Skip to main content

Full text of "Forgery_In_Christianity"

See other formats

1 35 723 



Is it God's Ward? 



A Documented Record of the Foundations of the 
Christian Religion 


Lately Major, Judge Advocate, U.S.A.; Associate Editor 

(in Section of Comparative Law) of American Bar 

Association Journal; Life Member of American 

Law Institute; etc., 




Copyright 1930 by Joseph Wheless 

All rights reserved no part of this book may be 

reprinted in any -form without permission in 

writing from the publisher 

In grateful appreciation 




Theologian Emeritus of 

a Treatise on the gods 




"ALL TRUTH is safe, and nothing else is 
safe; and he who keeps back the truth, or 
withholds it from men, from motives of ex- 
pediency, is either a coward or a criminal, or 
MAX MTJI/LEB, TTie Science of Religion, p. 11. 

"The time has come for honest men to de- 
nounce false teachers and attack false gods/' 

Luther Burbank 

:A]sr is A BEUGIOTJS ANIMAL. is incurably religious,'* are com- 
monplaces of clerical rhetoric. The priestly "Doctors of 
Divinity" who unctuously utter these pious and apocryphal 
platitudes fathered by the wish, urge the incurable state of 
mind the religious neurosis of their patients in proof of the 
divinely ordered nature of the malady, as patent of the necessity and 
importance of their "sacred science" of soul-cure, and the divine 
warrant for their continuance in perpetuity in their practice upon 
otherwise damned humanity. 

It is the ghostly Doctors themselves, however, who by their 
quackeries have created the fiction of the disease, and who purposely 
keep the patient opiated and on the crutches of Faith, in order to 
"make their calling and election sure," and to perpetuate their thrall- 
ing dominion over the mind and money of man. The first recorded 
priestly ban by threat and fear of death was on Nature's own 
Golden Specific for superstition and priestcraft, the fruit of the 
Tree of Knowledge: "Thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that 
thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Gen. ii, 17.) A warden 
with a flaming sword was posted to guard the Tree : sword, and rack, 
and stake, civil and political outlawry, social and business ostracism, 
and loss of living, odious Odium Theologicwm and foul calumny, have 



ever since been so far as possible yet are the consecrated weapons 
of priestcraft to keep mankind ignorant and obedient to the priests. 
"No beast in nature is so implacable as an offended saint," is axio- 
matic of those who prate of loving their enemies. As Jurgen pic- 
turesquely says : "The largest lake in Hell is formed by the blood 
which the followers of the 'Prince of Peace 5 have shed in advancing 
his cause," and their selfish own, as we shall abundantly see in 
the following pages. 


Howbeit, their pulpits and their press are lugubriously vocal with 
Jeremiads bewailing the ever-swelling tide of Unbelief in the land, 
throughout Christendom. The Church statistics, notoriously padded 
after the Biblical model of the Censuses in the Wilderness, can claim 
at most some forty-odd millions of adherents many of them by lip- 
service and non-paying (therefore negligible), and others many non- 
distinguished for piety or common honesty out of the hundred and 
twenty-odd millions of our American population. The Reverend 
Rector of Trinity Church in New York City (one of the wealthiest 
deadhand taxfree land monopolists in America) thus bewails: "In 
America we are dealing with a country, the majority of whose in- 
habitants are pagans. . . . Only forty percent of the population 
acknowledges affiliation with any Church." (N. Y. Times, Mch. 15, 
1930.) The ex-Secretary of the Home Missions Council of one of the 
great Churches bemoans : "There has been a tremendous revolution 
in the history of the Church. . . . The country church is waning 
and dying. . . . The revolution under our eyes is found in the mode 
of fhinkmg of the whole country.*' (N. F. Times, Jan. 8, 1930), An 
effective cause is found in the recent survey report of the Federal 
Council of Churches, to be in "the acceptance of a scientific view of life 
. . . general questioning of formerly revered authority . . * with 
absolute religious and ethical authority dethroned, . , . Women have 
made no comparable advance in participation in church affairs. . . . 
It can hardly be said that the church is an influential factor in the lives 
of the working classes." (N. Y. Herald-Tribune, Jan. 31, 1930,) A 
curious confession of likely cause and effect, in the mental calibre 
of the credent is stated by the Reverend publicity counsel of a 


national Church: "AH sermons should be keyed to the mentality of a 
fifteen-year-old youth. , . , Half the people of the United States 
have the mentality of a fifteen-year-old youth. Most church-goers 
enjoyed the 'children's sermon 5 more than the one on religious phi- 
losophy. . . . The average man can carry only one idea at a time." 
(Herald-Tribune, Jan. 28, 1930.) Verily, "Of such is the Kingdom 
of Heaven." 

All Fools' Day seems to be a sort of New Year's for ecclesiastical 
statistics and general stock-taking of the faithful: annually at that 
time the very religious Christian Herald publishes its collect of fig- 
ures on Church membership ; the Catholic Directory emits its own ; 
and the generality of Divines gives voice to holy Lamentations and 
pious warnings to the Church and to the ungodly. From this year's 
extensive crop a little sheaf is added, the matter being important to 
our purposes, and curiously instructive as depicting the accelerated 
downward tobogganing of the Faith. The Report of the Christian 
Herald discloses : "The total of communicants last year [1929] was 
50,006,566," of which number it assigns a total of 18,051,680 to the 
fourteen sects of Catholic dis-Unity (Herald-Tribune, Apl. 26, 
1930) ; though the figures of the Catholic Directory are 20,178,202. 
(/&. Apl. 16, 1930). Under the alarming caption "Warns Protes- 
tant Church it is Lagging," the Report of the Director of the Church 
Survey bemoans: "The Protestant Church in America is not keep- 
ing pace with the population. . . . American Protestantism in- 
creased from 7 in each 100 of the population in 1800 to 24* in each 
100 of the population of 1900. During the past thirty years Protes- 
tantism has not increased its ratio of the population as much as one 
member more per hundred." This is a very notable disclosure: that 
for a whole century the very vocal and intolerant Protestant popu- 
lation of this country has varied between *t% and 24% of the total 
population, and is today less than 25% : yet this petty minority 
dingdongs that this is a "Christian country," and imposes its lu- 
dicrous medieval "Blue Laws" and tyrannous proscriptions as will 
be noted upon the great anti-clerical majority of the people. And 
further striking figures follow from the same source : "A study made 
in 1912 [i. e. before Woman Suffrage], exclusively in cities, 
found two-thirds of the Protestant city membership consisted of 



women. . . There has been a steady proportionate decrease of in- 
terest in religion among women of the United States. ... It was 
also found [in this present Survey] that only 18 percent of the 
country population is in Church membership, although it is custom- 
ary to think of country people as highly religious. [They, too, are 
becoming more educated.] In New York City, the Church population 
is reported equally divided among Protestants, Roman Catholics and 
Jews. Only about eight percent of the population are members of the 
Protestant churches," thus only some 24% of the people of New 
York City among all three much-divided sects. (N. Y. Times, May 
5, 1930.) In a recent abusive set of letters by three True Believers of 
the same family name (one a Rev.), addressed to the Editor of a 
Metropolitan paper for writing sanely about the Tabooed Subject 
of Birth Control, this was denounced as an "insult to over 2,000,000" 
Faithful in this City. (Herald-Tribune, Apl. 12, 1930.) But the 
Faithful boast of their 444 churches in Greater New Yoi*k: if each 
had the exaggerated membership of 1,000, let the reader do his own 
figuring and note the result. And foreign immigration of the Faithful 
has been sadly curtailed of late by law. 

The true significance to the Church of the great slump in its mem- 
bership and hence revenues, is crudely "given away" by the Very 
Rev. Episcopal Bishop of Long Island, lamenting like conditions in 
his Diocese: "The growth of population during the last decade on 
Long Island has been a challenge to the Church, . . The Episcopal 
Bishop of the diocese advocated [in a public address] a drive to 
bring into the church the wealthy residents of Long Island." 
(Herald-Tribune, May 6, 1930.) The Most Rev. Episcopal superior 
of the last-lamenting has made a famous discovery, and with oracular 
gravity which evokes a smile he assigns its cause: "There are no 
great poets, painters, writers, nor musicians [only great Manni- 
kins of Bishops] today, and the cause of this artistic deficiency 
can be found in the moderns' total disregard for religion*" (Episc. 
Bishop of Manhattan: HeraLd-Tr&wie, ApL 21, 1930.) And the 
Highly Rev. Bishop of the National Capital thus portentously, and 
truly, glooms : "There is an organized movement, world-wide in scope, 
to unsettle Christian ideals and Christian institutions, both in Rus- 
sia and elsewhere" (Ib. May 13, 1930) ; which, judging by the age- 


old gigantic failure of both as herein we shall see, is not so much 
to be wondered. 

So far as Russia is concerned (and the fact and the reason for 
it apply as well to every other "Christian" country), the reason 
is truly stated by the pious Editor of Atlantis in a Jeremiad of con- 
fession before the Institute of Citizenship just held in Atlanta: "For 
a thousand years, ewer since Russia became a Christian country, and 
more especially in the last 200 years, when the Czar became the offi- 
cial head of the Church, the State religion in Russia was one of the 
means whereby the Russian people were oppressed, exploited and 
kept in ignorance. . . . The Russian people had a score to settle 
with the Church after the revolution, and they took full advantage 
of it" (N. Y. Times, ApL 8, 1930), a like chance for which all Chris- 
tendom is looking. The very religious Editor continues to confess: 
"It is useless to deny that the Church, in most instances, has lost its 
hold upon vast majorities of the people." (Ibid.) At the Christian 
Herald Institute of Religion held this year at Buck Hill Falls, Pa., 
a perfect symposium of Jeremiads bewailed Faith on the Toboggan : 
"Unless emphasis on elaborate creeds does not cease, we will deliver 
ourselves into the hands of the Humanists for the defeat which we 
deserve" . . . "The Church is simply going to pieces in the small 
towns of the Middle West. . . . The paganization of rural America 
is going on so fast that if we wait for even the union of closely allied 
denominations to be accomplished, it will mean ruination." . . . 
"The greatest difficulty in effecting mergers of churches lies in person- 
alities and prejudices." (Herald-Tribune, May 15, 1930.) Thus today, 
after nearly two thousand years of the "sweetness and light" of our 
Divine Christian religion, "personalities and prejudices" among those 
taught to love even their enemies persist and keep the Fold of Christ 
divided into mutually-hating Flocks; precisely so that the olden 
Pagan sneer at the early Christians is perfectly befitting their suc- 
cessors today: "There is no wild beast so ferocious as Christians who 
differ concerning their faith." (Lecky, Rationalism in Europe, ii, 81.) 

To conclude this review of pregnant figures and confessions, two 
luminous revelations are in one day made of cause and effect. Says 
the eminent Rev. President of the National Bible Institute : ". . . be- 
cause the Bible has ceased to have authority either in the pulpit 



or in the pew. Decline in church attendance and decrease in church 
membership are almost invariably traceable to unbelief in the divine 
inspiration and authority of the Bible," due to increasing knowl- 
edge of its true character, as herein revealed. (Herald-Tribune, May 
26, 1930.) And the ghastly irony and joke of the whole huge bank- 
ruptcy of Faith is thus exposed by the egregious Pastor of a Brook- 
lyn Baptist Flock, who images the Missionary "selling" the Faith 
to the benighted Heathen : " I have a religion here that will do you 
poor heathen a lot of good. Of course it hasn't succeeded very well 
at home, but we are sure it will do you a lot of good/ " (Ibid.) It's 
just like God told the Jews : You shan't sell the dead carcasses found 
by the way to the Chosen ; "but thou shalt give it unto the stranger 
that is in thy gates, that he may eat it ; or thou mayst sell it unto an 
alien"! (Deut. xiv, 21.) So the dead cats of Faith are flung out of 
the sanctuary as unfit for the Knowing, but are peddled to the igno- 
rant heathen for whatever the refuse may bring of clerical revenue. 

Like conditions exist in all priest-ridden lands. The Rt. Rev. Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury in his call for the decennial Lambeth Confer- 
ence for 1930, at which over sixty of the Episcopal bishops of this 
country are to attend, sounds a fateful monition : "The new knowl- 
edge of the Bible and still more of the universe in which we live still 
confuses and bewilders the beliefs of many of our clergy and people- 
There are tendencies in the life of our Church which suggest the prev~ 
alence of forms of belief . . . which almost exclude belief in God the 
Father and God the Holy Spirit." (Herald-Tribune, Mch, 12, 1930.) 
Wails the Rev. Pyke to the annual Assembly of the National 
Council of Evangelical Churches of England : "A large part of Eng- 
land has lapsed into semi-heathenism ; . . * our half -filled churches." 
(Herald-Tribune, Apl. 20, 1930.) Such creed-searchings and churchly 
lamentations over their moribund condition may be multiplied into 

Some potent cure thus seems to be at work. This curative specific is 
simply increasing popular knowledge : "Know the truth and the truth 
shall make you free," is the Golden Recipe for the religious disorder. 
What Cicero said of the Pythian Oracles may as truly be applied to 
every form of priestcraft : "When men began to be less credulous, their 
power vanished." 


by day, as knowledge increaseth and spreads amongst the 
people in the pews as well as among the parsons, does it become more 
difficult and embarrassing for the pulpiteers to "put over" their tales 
of myth and magic to the hearers of the Word. Even the clergy are 
becoming awakened to the stinging truth aimed at priests and the 
priest-taught by Prof. Shotwell: "Where we can understand, it is a 
moral crime to cherish the mi-understood," and are beginning to feel 
the humiliation of their false position. A noted clerical educator, Dr. 
Reinold Niebuhr, professor of Christian Ethics in that hotbed of every 
heresy, the Union Theological Seminary, in his textbook suggestively 
entitled Leaves -from the Notebook of a Tamed Cynic, makes this 
confession of recognized Dishonesty in the mass of clerical teaching 
and preaching: "As a teacher your only interest is to discover the 
truth. As a preacher you must conserve other interests besides the 
truth. It is your business to deal circumspectly with the whole reli- 
gious- inheritance lest the virtues [ ?] which are involved in the older 
traditions perish through your iconoclasm. That is a formidable task 
and a harrassing one; for one can never be quite sure where pedagog- 
ical caution ends AND DISHONESTY BEGINS" ! (Quoted by Alva 
Johnston in N. Y. Heralds-Tribune, Mch. 8, 1930.) 

The great Church Father, Bishop St. Augustine (of whom more 
hereafter), was wise to the psychology of at least Pagan religion 
the mode of its incipience and the manner of its age-long persist- 
ence. The priests and the priest-taught, he tells, instilled the virus of 
superstition into their victims when "small and weak," when they 
knew not to resist or healthily to react against the contaminating 
inoculation; "then, afterwards, it was necessary that succeeding 
generations should preserve the traditions of their ancestors, drMcmg 
in this superstition with their mother's milk." (Augustine, City of 
God, rsdi, 6.) Thinks one that this cunning modus operandi is confined 
only to Pagan priestcrafts and superstitions ? 

If, instead of the saintly Doctors of Hebrao-Christian Divinity, 
injecting their saving "opiate of the people" into the cradled babes of 
Christ, it were the abhorred Doctors of Mohammedan or Mormon 
Divinity who got to the cradles first, those infant souls would all 
but surely be lost to the Christ, and in their God's tender mercy, as 
assured by the sainted Augustine, would spend eternity crawling on 



the candent floors of Hell, playing with the "worm that never dies" : 
hardly from the cradle to the grave could all the Christian purges 
for Sin and pills for Sal[i]vation of Soul, later administered, serve for 
effective catharsis of the venom of those Christianly-hated "super- 
stitions, drunk in with their mother's milk. 55 

This truth is strikingly stated in an eloquent period by Ingersoll, 
and stunningly confirmed and confessed by the syndicated Prophet 
of Protestantism below to be quoted. The former opens his classic 
Why I Am an Agnostic, with these trenchant words : 

"For the most part we inherit our opinions. We are the heirs of habits 
and mental customs. Our beliefs, like the fashions of our garments, depend 
on where we were born. We are moulded and fashioned by our surround- 
ings. Environment is a sculptor a painter. 

"If we had been born in Constantinople, the most of us would have 
said: 'There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet.' If our 
parents had lived on the banks of the Ganges, we would have been wor- 
shippers of Siva, longing for the heaven of Nirvana. 

"As a rule, children love their parents, believe what they teach, and 
take great pride in saying that the religion of mother is good enough 
for them. . . . 

"The Scotch are Calvinists because their fathers were. The Irish are 
Catholics because their fathers were. The English are Episcopalians be- 
cause their fathers were, and the Americans are divided into a hundred 
sects because their fathers were. . . . Children are sometimes superior 
to their parents, modify their ideas, change their customs, and arrive at 
different conclusions." (Works, iv, 5-6; cf. I* It God*9 Word? 2nd. ed. 
p. v.) 

The truth thus uttered by the great Agnostic finds its confirma- 
tion curiously wrung from the lips of the Bellwether of would-be 
"reconciliationists" of primitive Superstition and modern Science* 
In a metropolitan newspaper carrying his syndicated "Daily Coun- 
sel" to the love-lorn and the misty-minded, a Virginia Believer puts 
to him challengingly the question direct: "Do you mean to imply 
that belief is largely a matter of environment, and if so, would you, 
not have been as firm a follower of Mahomet as you are of Christ if 
you had been born of Mahometan parentage and brought up in that 
faith? 5 ' For once there was no chance for Conmanian suppleness of 
evasion, so the blunt and confusing truth is forced: Yes ! "It is fairly 


certain that had I been cradled in Mohametans [sic~\ I should now 
have been turning toward Mecca at the appointed hours" ! (N. Y. 
Herald-Tribune, Oct. 29, 1929.) Thus the champion special pleader 
for the fast fading faith of Christ confesses away the divinely self- 
evident "truth" of his Christian faith, admits that it is the result not 
of independent thought and convincing proofs to his mind, but the 
inheritance of the cradle and the nursery, that that towering in- 
tellect would today be bearing witness to the "revealed truth" of 
a false God and religion, if he had chanced to be "born that way" ! 
Allah would to him and to millions be true and living God and 
Jehovah a crude barbarian myth, but for the accident of birth and 
teaching, a reversal of the whole scheme of salvation! Thus the 
Cradle determines the Creed ; it is the virus of the superstition-germ 
first injected which infects the credulity-center of the brain and colors 
too-oft through life the whole concept of "religious truth" in the 
mind of the patient. 

The psychology of the priestly maxim "Disce primum quod 
credendum est Learn first what is to be believed," and the persistent 
virulence of the virus thus injected, is aptly signified by the Rev. Wen- 
ner, 83-year old Bellwether of Lutheranism in America, and for 61 
years pastor of one of its oldest sheep-folds in New York City : "I 
do not think that time has produced many changes in the attitude of 
Lutheran worshippers, because of the stable nature of the religious 
education we give the youth of our sect. From the age of six onward 
we instruct them in the tenets of our faith, and they usually abide." 
(N. Y. Herald-Tribune, Oct. 10, 1929.) 

The predilect precept of the Doctors of every brand of Divinity 
forever is : "Catch 'em in the cradle, and get 'em inoculated before 
they know." In the bib and rattle period, the childish brain is a soft, 
clean surface, "soft as wax to be moulded into vice," as His Holiness 
says : helpless it receives and retains whatever is first impressed or 
imposed upon it : true religion or false, Christ or Crishna or Santa 
Claus, Holy Ghost or the ghosts of Afric superstition. "Give us a 
child until it is seven, and we've got it cinched for life," is the ghoul- 
ish axiom of all the Faiths : "Suffer little children to come unto me, 
for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven," as of the heathen Nirvana. 
How godly a work is it to sear the thoughtless child mind with the 



brand of Faith ; how infamous and damnable to offer to the "imma- 
ture" and inept youth in college freedom from the stigma of credulity ! 
How crude and cruel for the Chinese to bind and cripple for life the 
feet of their girl children; how fiendish the custom of sundry savage 
tribes, ignorant of the "Light of the World/* to clamp the infant 
heads between boards so as to produce the 'hideous deformity of skull 
so esthetically popular among them; but how pleasing to gods and 
priests to fetter the child mind in the bonds of Faith, and so to dwarf 
and deaden the mind's most precious faculty Reason! "To suc- 
ceed/* eloquently said Ingersoll, "the theologians invade the cradle, 
the nursery. In the brain of innocence they plant the seeds of super- 
stition. They pollute the minds and imaginations of children. They 
frighten the happy with threats of pain they soothe the wretched 
with gilded lies. . . . All of these comforting and reasonable things 
are taught by the ministers in their pulpits by teachers in Sunday 
schools and by parents at home. The children are victims. They are 
assaulted in the cradle in their mother's arms. Then, the school- 
master carries on the war against their natural sense, and all the 
books they read are filled with the same impossible truths. The poor 
children are helpless. The atmosphere they breathe is filled with lies 
lies that mingled with their blood." (Works, iv, 10). This unholy 
cradle-robbing goes on with vehement zest. The Churches, the Fed- 
eral Council of Churches, the Vicar of God and his adjutants, all 
ply amain the arts of enslaving the babe in the cradle, the child in 
the school. In the Encyclical of December 31, 1929, the right of the 
Church to the child is proclaimed as above that of parents and State ; 
the secular public schools are damned, and the prole of the Faithful 
are forbidden to attend and mingle with the "irreligious" State pupils : 
"the frequenting of non-Catholic schools, namely, those which are 
open to Catholic and non-Catholic alike, is forbidden to Catholic 
children," as such a school is not "a fit place for Catholic students," 
who must be baited with "the supernatural, 5 ' (Current History Mclu 
1930, p. 1091, passim.} Yet the banned and cursed Public Schools of 
New York City, forbidden to the Faithful child, the ecclesiastical 
City government fills with Faithful teachers for the purpose of "boot- 
legging" the forbidden supernaturalism into them ; & work so wide- 
spread and active, that the Cardinal Archbishop of the City, address- 


ing over 2000 of the Catholic Teachers Association, "praises their 
work of teaching faith in City Institutions. 5 * (N. Y. Times, Nov. 25, 
1928.) And every rationalist effort to counteract such illegal prop- 
aganda and to free the schools from the pernicious influences of super- 
stition, is denounced and opposed by the Bible bootleggers of every 
brand of Faith ; and in the brave instance of Russia, a medieval orgy of 
prayer-assault on High Heaven is made, to counsel God what he 
ought to do to the Russians for their "godless" efforts to save the chil- 
dren of that Church-cursed land from the superstitions of priestcraft. 

In an ironical letter to the English press, in which he "enters the 
lists against the British critics of Moscow's anti-clerical policy," 
George Bernard Shaw, writing under a transparent Russian pseu- 
donym, says : "In Russia we take religious questions very seriously. 
We protect our children very carefully against proselytizers of our 
fantastic sects until they are old enough to make up their own minds. 
To us, it is inconceivable that a government would tolerate the incul- 
cation upon helpless children of beliefs that will not stand the most 
strenuous scientific examination or in which the teachers themselves 
do not honestly believe. . . . We cannot understand why the so-called 
Articles of Religion, which have been described by one of the most 
learned and intellectually gifted of your churchmen as capable of be- 
ing professed only by 'f ools, bigots or liars,' are deliberately taught 
as divine truths in your schools. . . . Russia is setting an example of 
intellectual and moral integrity to the whole world, while England 
is filling its temples with traders, persecuting its clergy, and bringing 
up children to be scoffers to whom religion means nothing but hypoc- 
risy and humbug." (Herald-Tribune, Apl. 7, 1930.) 

Thus the Church enchains the Reason. The proudest boast today 
of the Church for its ex-Pagan Saint Augustine, is that : "as soon as a 
contradiction [between his "philosophy" and his religious doc- 
trines] arises, he never hesitates to subordinate his philosophy to 
religion, reason to faith"! (Cath. Encyc. ii, 86.) So this great ex- 
Pagan Saint of the Church surrenders his reason to faith, and avers : 
"I would not believe the Gospels to be true, unless the authority of 
the Catholic Church constrained me"! (Augustine, De Genesi.) 

lagersoll, 'in one of his glowing, devastating periods of oratory, 
said: "Somebody ought to tell the truth about the Bible!" That I 



have already essayed quite comprehensively to do. In my recent 
work, Is l lt God's Word? (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, 1926, 2nd 
and 3rd Editions), I devote some five hundred pages to "An Exposi- 
tion of the Fables and Mythology of the Bible and of the Impostures 
of Theology,'* as my thesis is defined in my sub-title. "A farrago of 
palpable nonsense," in the words of the Dean of American critics, is 
about all that remains of Holy Writ as the pretended "Word of 
God," as the result of that searching analysis. 

That 1 study was limited, in most part, to the sacred texts for the 
internal evidences, which themselves so abundantly afford, of their 
own falsity and primitive-minded fatuity. On the other phase of in- 
quiry I there limited myself to the suggestive remark : "The gospels 
are all priestly forgeries over a century after their pretended dates" 
(p. 279 ; cf. p. 400), purposing then to complement the work by this 
sequel or companion volume, treating the frauds and forgeries of re- 
ligion and the Church. 

Taking up now more particularly the second phase of my subject, 
I here propose to treat of the inveterate forgeries, frauds, impostures, 
and mendacities of Priestcraft and its Theology. I shall be explicit 
and plain spoken, and unmistakably state my purpose and my proofs* 
For nearly two thousand years the priestcraft of Christendom, for 
purposes of domination by fear and greedy exploitation through im- 
posture upon credulity, has consigned to earthly fire and sword> and 
to eternal damnation all who dared to dissent or to protest; the 
priestly word "miscreant," misbeliever, has become the synonym for 
everything foul and criminal in human nature. The day of reckoning 
and of repudiation is at hand; Priestcraft has here its destroying 
answer, in very plain and unafraid words. 

This book is a grave indictment, impossible to be made or to be 
credited unless supported at every point by incontrovertible facts. 
These I promise to produce and array in due and devastating order. 


I charge, and purpose to prove, from unimpeachable texts and 
historical records, and by authoritative clerical confessions, beyond 
the possibility of denial, evasion, or refutation: 


1. That the Bible, in its every Book, and in the strictest legal and 
moral sense, is a huge forgery. 

2. That every Book of the New Testament is a forgery of the Chris- 
tian Church ; and every significant passage in those Books, on which 
the fabric of the Church and its principal Dogmas are founded, is 
a further and conscious later forgery, wrought with definite fraudu- 
lent intent. 

3. Especially, and specifically, that the "famous Petrine text" 
"Upon this Rock I will build my church" the cornerstone of the gi- 
gantic fabric of imposture, and the other, "Go, teach all nations," 
were never uttered by the Jew Jesus, but are palpable and easily- 
proven late Church forgeries. 

4. That the Christian Church, from its inception in the first little 
Jewish-Christian religious societies until it reached the apex of its 
temporal glory and moral degradation!, was a vast and tireless 

5. That the Church was founded upon, and through the Dark Ages 
of Faith has battened on (yet languishes decadently upon) monu- 
mental and petty forgeries and pious frauds, possible only because of 
its own shameless mendacity and through the crass ignorance and su- 
perstition of the sodden masses of its deluded votaries, purposely kept 
in that base condition for purposes of ecclesiastical graft and aggran- 
dizement through conscious and most unconscionable imposture. 

6. That every conceivable form of religious lie, fraud and imposture 
has ever been the work of Priests ; and through all the history of the 
Christian Church, as through all human history, has been and, so 
far as they have not been shamed out of it by skeptical ridicule and 
exposure, yet is, the age-long stock in trade and sole means of existence 
of the priests and ministers of all the religions. 

7. That the clerical mind, which "reasons in chains," is, from its 
vicious and vacuous "education," and' the special selfish interests of 
the priestly class, incapable either of the perception or the utterance 
of truth, in matters where the interests of priestcraft are concerned, 

As the Catholic-Protestant-Skeptic Bayle, of seventeenth century 
fame, said: "I am most truly a Protestant ; for I protest indifferently 
against all systems and all sects" of religious imposture. 



My accusal, therefore, is not limited in purpose, scope or effect to 
any one Church or sect, but is aimed alike at all of the discordant 
factions of ancient Jewish and more modern Christian faith. For, 
as has been well said, "Faith is not knowledge, no more than that three 
is four, but eminently contained in it ; so that he that knows, believes, 
and something more ; but he that believes many times does not know 
nay, if he doth barely and merely believe, he doth never know." The 
same critical cleric at another place said: "still less was it ever in- 
tended that men should so prostitute their reason, as to believe with 
infallible faith what they are unable to prove with infallible argu- 
ments." (Chillingworth, Religion of Protestants, pp. 66, 412.) With 
infallible facts I purpose to blast the false pretenses of Priest-forged 

It is matter of fact, that for some 1500 years of this Era there was 
but one "True Church" of Christ ; and that Church claims with con- 
scious pride the origin and authorship of all the New Testament 
Books, out of its own Holy bosom, by its own canonized Saints. The 
New Testament Books are, therefore, distinctively Catholic docu- 
ments. That Church, therefore, if these its credentials and documents 
are forgeries, as from its own records I shall prove itself forged all 
the Books of the New Testament and all the documents of religious 
dogma and propaganda the forgery of which shall be proved in this 
book, and did itself perpetrate all the pious frauds herein revealed, 
and is their chief beneficiary. All the other Christian sects, however, are 
sprung or severed from the original One True Church ; "all other 
forms of the Christian religion , . . originated by secession from the 
True Church, . . . and their founders . . . were externally members 
of the Church." (CE. vii, 367.) All these Protestant sects, therefore, 
with full knowledge of the guilty facts and partakers in the frauds, 
found their claim to Divinity and priestly emoluments upon and 
through those tainted titles, and thus yet fully share the guilt as ac- 
complices after the fact. The "Reformed" Sects, on breaking away 
from the old Monopoly of Forgery, appropriated the least clumsy and 
more plausible of the pious Counterfeit of Christianity, and for the 
centuries since have industriously and knowingly been engaged in 
passing the stolen counterfeit upon their own unsuspecting flocks ; they 
are therefore equally guilty with the original Forgers of the Faith* 



The proofs of my indictment are marvellously easy. They are to 
be found in amplest store of history and accredited ecclesiastic au- 
thorities, and in abounding incautious admissions made by the ac- 
credited spokesmen of the Accused : upon these I shall freely and fully 
draw for complete proofs of my every specification. These damning 
things of the Church, scattered through many clerical volumes and 
concealed in many archives, are not well known to the pious or preoc- 
cupied layman. My task is simply to bring together the documentary 
proofs and expose them before the astonished eyes of the modern 
reader ; that is the prime merit of my work. To accomplish this purpose 
with unimpeachable certitude, I need and make no apology for the 
liberal use of quotation marks in presenting the ensuing startling ar- 
ray of accusations and confessions; to be followed by the plenary 

As in the judicial process, I shall, before proceeding to the con- 
crete proofs, define first the crime charged, and outline the scope of 
the evidence to be presented. I shall first make a prvma facie justifica- 
tion of the charges, by citing a few generalities of confession of guilt, 
with corroborations by weighty supporting authorities, and thus 
create the proper "atmosphere" for the appreciation of the facts. 
Then shall come the shaming proofs in astounding detail. 


Forgery, in legal and moral sense, is the utterance or publication, 
with intent to deceive or defraud, or to gain some advantage, of a 
false document, put out by one person in the name of and as the gen- 
uine work of another, who did not execute it, or the subsequent altera- 
tion of a genuine document by one who did not execute the original. 
This species of falsification extends alike to all classes of writings, 
promissory notes, the coin or currency of the realm, to any legal or 
private document, or to a book. All are counterfeit or forged if not 
authentic and untampered. 

A definition by a high ecclesiastical authority may appropriately 
be cited, as it thoroughly defines the chronic clerical crime. The Cath- 
olic Encyclopedia thus defines the crime : 



"Forgery (Lat. falsum) differs very slightly from fraud. It consists in 
the deliberate untruthfulness of an assertion, or in the deceitful presenta- 
tion of an object, and is based on an intention to deceive and to injure 
while using the externals of honesty. Forgery is truly a falsehood and is 
a fraud, but it is something more. ... A category consists in making use 
of such forgery, and is equivalent to forgery proper. . . . The Canonical 
legislation [dealt principally with] the production of absolutely false 
documents and the alteration of authentic . . . for the sake of certain 
advantages. . . . 

"Canon law connects forgery and the use of forged documents, on the 
presumption that he who would make use of such documents must be either 
the author or instigator of the forgery. In canon law forgery consists not 
only in the fabrication or substitution of an entirely false document, but 
even by partial substitution, or by any alteration affecting the sense and 
bearing of an authentic document or any substantial point, such as names, 
dates, signature, seal, favour granted, by erasure, by scratching out or 
writing one word over another, and the like." (Catholic Encyclopedia, 
vi, 135, 136.) 

Under every phase and phrase of this its own clerico-legal defini- 
tion, the Church is guilty, is most guilty. 

A "beginning of miracles" of confession of ecclesiastical guilt of 
forgery of Church documents is made in the same above article by 
the Encyclopedia,* very many others will follow in due course from 
the same source: 

"Substitution of false documents and tampering with genuine ones was 
quite a trade in the Middle Ages. Innocent III (1198) points out nine 
species of forgery [of ecclesiastical records] which had come under his 
notice." (CE. vi, 136.) 

But such frauds of the Church were not confined to the Middle 
Ages ; they begin even with the beginning of the Church and infest 
every period of its history for fifteen hundred years and defile nearly 
every document, both of "Scriptures" and of Church aggrandizement. 
As truly said by Collins, in his celebrated Discourse of Free Thinking: 

"In short, these frauds are very common in all books which are pub- 
lished by priests or priestly men. . . . For it is certain they may plead the 
authority of the Fathers for Forgery, Corruption and mangling of 
Authors, with more reason than for any of their Articles of Faith." (p, 96-) 


Bishop Eusebius of Csesarea, the great "Father of Church His- 
tory" (324* A. 3>.) whom Niebuhr terms "a very dishonest writer," 
of which we shall see many notable instances, -says this : "But it is not 
our place to describe the sad misfortunes which finally came upon [the 
Christians], as we do not think it proper, moreover, to record their 
divisions and unnatural conduct to each other before the persecution 
[by Diocletian, 305 A. D.]. Wherefore we have decided to relate 
nothing concerning them except things in which we can vindicate the 
Divine judgment. . . . But we shall introduce into this history in 
general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and 
afterwards to posterity." (Ecclesiastical History, viii, 2 ; N&PNF. i, 

Eusebius himself fraudulently "subscribed to the [Trinitarian] 
Creed formed by the Council of Nicaea, but making no secret, in the 
letter which he wrote to his own Church, of the non-natn/ral sense in 
which he accepted it." (Cath. Encyc. v, 619.) As St. Jerome says, 
"Eusebius is the most open champion of the Arian heresy," which 
'denies the Trinity. (Jerome, Epist. 84, 2; NfyPNF. vi, 176.) Bishop 
Eusebius, as we shall see, was one of the most prolific forgers and liars 
of his age of the Church, and a great romancer ; in his hair-raising 
histories of the holy Martyrs, he assures us "that on some occasions the 
bodies of the martyrs who had been devoured by wild beasts, upon the 
beasts being strangled, were found alive in their stomachs, even after 
having been fully digested" ! (quoted, Gibbon, History, Ch. 37 ; Lard- 
ner, iv, p. 91 ; Diegesis, p. 272). To such an extent had the "pious 
frauds of the theologians been thus early systematized and raised to 
the dignity of a regular doctrine," that Bishop Eusebius, "in one of 
the most learned and elaborate works that antiquity has left us, the 
Thirty-second Chapter of the Twelfth Book of his Evangelical Prep- 
aration, bears for its title this scandalous proposition: 'How it may 
be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the 
Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived 3 " (quoting the Greek 
title; Gibbon, Vindication, p. 76). 

St. John Chrysostom, the "Golden Mouthed," in his work On the 
Priesthood, has a curious panygeric on the clerical habit of telling lies : 
"Great is the force of deceit ! provided it is not excited by a treacherous 
intention." (Comm. on I Cor. W, 19; Diegesis, p. 309.) Chrysostom 



was one of the Greek Fathers of the Church, concerning whom Dr. 
(later Cardinal) Newman thus apologetically spoke: "The Greek 
Fathers thought that, when there was a justa causa, an untruth need 
not be a lie. . . . Now, as to the just cause, . . . the Greek Fathers 
make them such as these self-defense, charity, zeal for God?s honour, 
and the like." (Newman, Apology for His Life, Appendix G, p. 34*5- 
6.) He says nothing of his favorites, the Latin Fathers; but we shall 
hear them described, and amply see them at work lying in their zeal 
for God's honor, and to their own dishonor. 

The Great Latin Father St. Jerome (c. 340-420), who made the 
celebrated Vulgate Version of the Bible, and wrote books of the most 
marvelous Saint-tales and martyr-yarns, thus describes the approved 
methods of Christian propaganda, of the Fathers, Greek and Latin 
alike, against the Pagans : 

"To confute the opposer, now this argument is adduced and now that. 
One argues as one pleases, saying one thing while one means another. . . . 
Origen, Methodius, Eusebius, and Apollinaris write at great length against 
Celsus and Porphyry. Consider how subtle are the arguments, how in- 
sidious the engines with which they overthrow what the spirit of the devil 
has wrought. Sometimes, it is true, they are compelled to say not what they 
think but 'what is needful. . . . 

"I say nothing of the Latin authors, of Tertullian, Cyprian, Minutius* 
Victorianus, Lactantius, Hilary, lest I should appear not so much to be 
defending myself as to be assailing others. I will only mention the APOS- 
TLE PAUL. , . . He, then, if anyone, ought to be calumniated; we should 
speak thus to him: The proofs which you have used against the Jews and 
against other heretics bear a different meaning in their own contexts to 
that which they bear in your Epistles. We see passages taken cap- 
tive by your pen and pressed into service to win you a victory, which 
in volumes from which they are taken have no controversial bearing at 
all . . . the line so often adopted by strong men in controversy of ju$ti- 
fying the means by the result/' (Jerome, Epitt. to Pammachu*, xlviii, 13; 
N$PNF. vi, 72-73; See post, p. 230.) 

Of Eusebius and the others he again says, that they "presume at 
the price of their soul to assert dogmatically whatever first comes into 
their head. 5 * (Jerome, Epist. li, 7; idf. p. 88.) And again, of the incen- 
tive offered by the gullible ignorance of the Faithful, for the glib 
mendacities of the priests : "There is nothing so easy as by sheer volur 


bility to deceive a common crowd or an uneducated congregation. 3 ' 
(Epist. lii, 8 ; p. 93.) Father Jerome's own high regard for truth and 
his zeal in propaganda of fables for edification of the ignorant ex- 
pagan Christians is illustrated in numberless instances. He tells us of 
the river Ganges in India, which "has its source in Paradise" ; that in 
India "are also mountains of gold, which however men cannot ap- 
proach by reason of the griffins, dragons, and huge monsters which 
haunt them ; for such are the guardians which avarice needs for its 
treasures." (Epist. cxxv, 6 ; NfyPNF. vi, 245.) He reaches the climax 
in his famous Lives of sundry Saints. He relates with all fervor the 
marvelous experiences of the "blessed hermit Paulus," who was 113 
years of age, and for sixty years had lived in a hole in the ground in 
the remotest recesses of the desert; his nearest neighbor was St. 
Anthony, who was only ninety and lived in another hole four days' 
journey away. The existence and whereabouts of Paulus being revealed 
to Anthony in a vision, he set out afoot to visit the holy Paulus. On 
the way, "all at once he beholds a creature of mingled shape, half horse 
half man, called by the poets Hippo-centaur," with whom he holds 
friendly converse. Later "he sees a mannikin with hooked snout, horned 
forehead, and extremities like goat's feet," this being one of the desert 
tribe "whom the Gentiles worship under the names of Fauns, Satyrs, 
and Incubi," and whose strange language Anthony was rejoiced to 
find that he could understand, as they reasoned together about the 
salvation of the Lord. "Let no one scruple to believe this incident," 
pleads Father Jerome ; "its truth is supported by" one of these crea- 
tures that was captured and brought alive to Alexandria and sent 
embalmed to the emperor at Antioch. Finally holy Anthony reached 
the retreat of the blessed Paulus, and was welcomed. As they talked, a 
raven flew down and laid a whole loaf of bread at their feet. "See," said 
Paulus, "the Lord truly loving, truly merciful, has sent us a meal. For 
the last sixty years I have always received half a loaf ; but at your 
coming the Lord has doubled his soldier's rations." During the visit 
Paulus died ; Anthony "saw Paulus in robes of snowy white ascending 
on high among a band of angels, and the choirs of prophets and apos- 
tles." Anthony dragged the body out to bury it, but was without means 
to dig a grave ; as he was lamenting this unhappy circumstance, "be- 
hold, two lions from the recesses of the desert with manes flying on 



their necks came rushing along; they came straight to the corpse 
of the blessed old man," fawned on it, roared in mourning, then with 
their paws dug a grave just wide and deep enough to hold the corpse; 
came over and licked the hands and feet of Anthony, and ambled away. 
(Jerome, Life of Paulus the First Hermit, NfyPNF. vi, 299 seq.) 

So gross and prevalent was the clerical habit of pious lies and pre- 
tenses "to the glory of God," that St. Augustine, about 395 A. r>., 
wrote a reproving treatise to the Clergy, De Mendacio (On Lying), 
which he found necessary to supplement in 420 with another book, 
Contra Mendacium (Against Lying). This work, says Bishop Words- 
worth, "is a protest against these 'pious frauds' which have brought 
discredit and damage on the cause of the Gospel, and have created 
prejudice against it, from the days of Augustine to our own times." 
(A Church History, iv, 93, 94.) While Augustine disapproves of 
downright lying even to trap heretics, a practice seemingly much 
in vogue among the good Christians : "It is more pernicious for Cath- 
olics to lie that they may catch heretics, than for heretics to lie that 
they may not be found out by Catholics" (Against Lying, ch. 5; 
NfyPNF. iii, 483) ; yet this Saint heartily approves and argues in sup- 
port of the chronic clerical characteristics of suppressio veri, of sup- 
pression or concealment of the truth for the sake of Christian "edifi- 
cation," a device for the encouragement of credulity among the 
Faithful which has run riot through the centuries and flourishes today 
among the priests and the ignorant pious : "It is lawful, then, either 
to him that discourses, disputes, and preaches of things eternal, or to 
him that narrates or speaks of things temporal pertaining to edifi* 
cation of religion or piety, to conceal at fitting times whatever seems 
fit to be concealed; but to tell a lie is never lawful, therefore neither to 
conceal by telling a lie." (Augustine, On Lymg, ch. 19 ; N&PNF. iii, 
466.) The great Bishop did not, however, it seems, reck his own rede 
when it came to preaching unto edification, for in one of his own ser- 
mons he thus relates a very notable experience: "I was already Bishop 
of Hippo, when I went into Ethiopia with some servants of Christ 
there to preach the Gospel. In this country we saw many men and 
women without heads, who had two great eyes in their breasts ; and in 
countries still more southly, we saw people who had but one eye in 
their foreheads." (Augustine, Sermon 37; quoted in Taylor, Syn 



tagma, p. 52 ; Diegesis, p. 271 ; Doane, Bible Myths, p. 437.) To the 
mind's eye the wonderful spectacle is represented, as the great Saint 
preached the word of God to these acephalous Faithful: we see the 
whole congregation of devout and intelligent Christians, without heads, 
watching attentively without eyes, listening intently without ears, and 
understanding perfectly without brains, the spirited and spiritual ha- 
rangue of the eloquent and veracious St. Augustine. And every hearer 
of the Sermon in which he told about it, believed in fulness of faith 
and infantile credulity every word of the noble Bishop of Hippo, giving 
thanks to God that the words of life and salvation had been by him 
carried to so remarkable a tribe of God's curious children. 

Pope Gregory the Great (590-604), in one momentary lapse in his 
own arduous labors of propagating '*lies to the glory of God," made 
the pious gesture, "God does not need our lies" ; but His Church evi- 
dently did, for the pious work went lyingly on ; a work given immense 
impetus by His Holiness Gregory himself, in his mendacious Dia* 
logues and other papal output, with little abatement unto this day. 

A further admission of the inveteracy of ecclesiastical forgery and 
fraud may be cited from the Catholic Encyclopedia. Speaking depre- 
catingly of the "incredible liberty of discussion" which to the shock 
and scandal of the pious prelates "prevailed in Rome under the spell 
of the Renaissance," when men's minds were beginning to awaken 
from the intellectual and moral stupor of the Dark Ages of Faith, 
the Catholic thesaurus of archaic superstition and "Catholic Truth," 
admits : 

"This toleration of evil [sic; Le.: the free discussion of Church 
doctrines and documents] bore one good consequence: it allowed his- 
torical criticism to begin fair. There was need for a revision which is not 
yet complete, ranging over all that has been handed down from the Middle 
Ages under the style and title of the Fathers, the Councils, the Roman and 
other official archives. In all these departments* forgery and interpola- 
tions as well as ignorance had wrought mischief on a great scale." (CE. 
xii, 768.) 

To these preliminary confessions of the guilty Church may be added 
the corroborating testimony of several eminently accredited historical 



Middleton, in his epochal Free Enquiry into the lying habits and 
miracles of the Churchmen, says : "Many spurious books were forged 
in the earliest times of the Church, in the name of Christ and his 
apostles, which passed upon all the Fathers as genuine and divine 
through several successive ages." (Middleton, Free Inquiry, Int. 
Disc. p. xcii ; London, 1749.) 

The same author, whose book set England ringing with its expo- 
sures of the lies and fraudulent miracles of the Church, makes this 
acute and accurate summing up of his evidences : 

"It will not appear strange to those who have given any attention to 
the history of mankind, which will always suggest this sad reflection: That 
the greatest zealots in religion, or the leaders of sects and parties, what- 
ever purity or principles they pretend to, have seldom scrupled to make 
use of a commodious lie for the advancement of what they call the truth. 
And with regard to these very Fathers, there is not one of them, as an 
eminent writer of ecclesiastical history declares, who made any scruple 
in those ages of using the hyperbolical style to advance the honor of God 
and the salvation of men." (Free Inq. p. 83; citing Jo v Hist. Eccles. p. 

Lecky, the distinguished author of the History of European 
Morals, devotes much research into what he describes as "the deliber- 
ate and apparently perfectly unscrupulous forgery of a whole 
literature, destined to further the propagation either of Christianity 
as a whole, or of some particular class of tenets." (Lecky, Hist, of 
European, Morals, vol. i, p. 375.) 

In his very notable History of Rationalism, speaking of that 
Christian "epoch when faith and facts did not cultivate an acquaint- 
ance, 55 the same author, Lecky, thus describes the state of intellectual 
and moral obliquity into which the Church had forced even the ablest 
classes of society : 

"During that gloomy period the only scholars in Europe were priests 
and monks, who conscientiously believed that no amount of falsehood was 
reprehensible which conduced to the edification of the people. . . . All 
their writings, and more especially their histories, became tissues of the 
wildest fables, so grotesque and at the same time so audacious, that they 
were the wonder of succeeding ages. And the very men who scattered these 
fictions broadcast over Christendom, taught at the same time that credulity 


was a virtue and skepticism a crime/* (Lecky, Hist, of Rationalism, i, 

In the same work last quoted, Lecky again, speaking of what he 
terms "the pious frauds of theologians,'* which, he shows were "sys- 
tematized and raised to the dignity of a regular doctrine," says of the 
pious Fathers : 

"The Fathers laid down as a distinct proposition that pious frauds were 
justifiable and even laudable, and if they had not laid this down they would 
nevertheless have practiced them as a necessary consequence of their doc- 
trine of exclusive salvation. Immediately all ecclesiastical literature be- 
came tainted with* a spirit of the most unblushing mendacity. Heathenism 
was to be combatted, and therefore prophecies of Christ by Orpheus and 
the Sibyls were forged, lying wonders were multiplied. . . . Heretics 
were to be convinced, and therefore interpolations of old writings or com- 
plete forgeries were habitually opposed to the forged Gospels. . . . The 
tendency . . . triumphed wherever the supreme importance of dogmas 
was held. Generation after generation it became more universal; it contin- 
ued till the very sense of truth and the very love of truth seemed blotted 
out from the minds of men." (Lecky, Rationalism in Europe, i, 

There is thus disclosed a very sharp and shaming contrast between 
the precept of the Lord Buddha : "Thou shalt not attempt, either by 
words or action, to lead others to believe that which is not true," and 
the confessed debasing principle of the Church, that the maintenance 
of its creed (even by the methods of fraud, forgery and imposture 
above hinted and to be evidenced) is superior to the principles of 
morality : 

"To undo the creed is to undo the Church. The integrity of the rule of 
faith is more essential to the cohesion of a religious society than the strict 
practice of its moral precepts" ! (CE. vii, 259). 

With its consciousness of the shifty and shady practices of its 
"sacred'* profession, the Christian priestcraft differs not from the 
Pagan in the sneer of Cicero : "Goto mirari se aiebat, quod non rideret 
haruspex, cum Tiaruspicem wdisset, Cato used to wonder how one of 
our priests can forbear laughing when he sees another." (Quoted 
Opera, Ed. Gron., p. 3806.) We shall see all too well that the Pagan 



estimate holds good for the Christian ; that, as said by the "universal 
scholar" Grotius: "Ecclesiastical history consists of nothing but 
the wickedness of the governing clergy, Qui legit historiam Eccle- 
siasticam, quid legit nisi Episcoporum viola?" (Epistolce, p. 7, 
col. 1). 

The universality of the frauds and impostures of the Church, above 
barely hinted at, and the contaminating influence of such example, are 
by now sufficiently evident; they will be seen to taint and corrupt 
every phase of the Church and of the ecclesiastical propaganda of the 
Faith. As is well said by Middleton in commenting on these and like 
pious practices of the Holy Church : "And no man surely can doubt, 
but that those, who would either forge, or make use of forged books, 
would, in the same cause, and for the same ends, make use of forged 
miracles" (A Free Inquiry, Introd. Discourse, p. Ixxxvii) ; as well 
as of forged Gospels, Epistles, Creeds, Saint-tales vast extensions 
of pious frauds of which we shall see a plethora of examples. 

The proofs here to be arrayed for conviction are drawn from 
original sources, chiefly those inexhaustible mines of priestly perver- 
sions of fact and truth, the labored and ludricrous volumes of the 
"Fathers of the Church," 1 and its most accredited modern American 
spokesman, the Catholic Encyclopedia. Hence it cannot be justly 
complained that this presentation of facts of Church history is unfair 
or untrue; all but every fact of secular and of Church history herein 
recounted to the shame and guilt of Holy Church is taken verbatim 
from the Church's own histories and historians* These clerical works 
of confession and confusion are for the most part three ponderous 
sets of volumes ; they are readily accessible for verification of my re- 
citals, and for further instances, in good libraries and bookshops ; the 
libraries of the Union Theological Seminary and of Columbia Uni- 
versity, in New York City, were the places of the finds here recorded. 
Cited so often, space will be saved for more valuable uses by citing by 
their initials, which will become very familiar my chief ecclesiasti- 
cal authorities^ towit : 

The Ante-Nicene Fathers, cited as A NF. ; A Collection of the extant 
Writings of all the Founders of Christianity down to the Council of 
Nicaea, or Nice, in 325 A. D. American Reprint, eight volumes. The 
Christian Literature Publishing Co., Buffalo, N. Y,, 1885. 



The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, cited as NfyPNF,; First and 
Second Series ; many volumes ; same publishers. 

The Catholic Encyclopedia, cited as CE.; fifteen volumes and index, 
published under the Imprimatur of Archbishop Farley ; New York, 
Robert Appleton Co., 1907-9. 

The Encyclopedia Biblica, cited as EB. 9 four volumes; Adam & 
Charles Black, London, 1899 ; American Reprint, The Macmillan Co., 
New York, 1914. 

The clerical confessions of lies and frauds in the ponderous vol- 
umes of the Catholic Encyclopedia alone suffice, and to spare, to wreck 
the Church and to destroy utterly the Christian religion. We shall see. 


The land, the religious world, even today is ringing with the furious 
din of religious intolerance, bigotry and persecution; pestiferous 
Medieval laws are imposed to stop the voice of Science teaching truths 
which impugn the ignorant myths of Bible and Theology. Tennessee 
and several States of the Union have passed laws making criminal 
the^teaching of scientific facts which contradict "the story of the 
divine creation of man as taught in the Bible," and like Hillbilly legis- 
lation is sought in all the States. The True Church lays down this 
amazing limitation on learning: "When a clearly defined dogma 
contradicts a scientific assertion, the latter has to be revised"! (CE. 
xiii, 607.) The civilized portion of the world has> just been shocked 
at the potential judicial murder and outrage sanctioned by law in 
North Carolina, as likewise in a number of other States, making out- 
laws of honest persons who, as parties in interest or witnesses in ac- 
tions civil and criminal, refuse to take the ridiculous and degrading 
Form of Oath "upon the Holy Evangelists of Almighty God, in token 
of his engagement to speak* the truth, as he hopes to be saved in the 
way and method of salvation pointed out in that blessed volume ; and 
in further token that, if he should swerve from the truth, he may be 
justly deprived of all the blessings of the Gospel, and be made liable to 
that vengeance which he has imprecated on his own head." 1 (Consol. 
Stat. N. C. 9 1919, sec. 3189.) 

Under this infamous statute, in the late so-called Gastonia, N. C. 


murder trial, the wife of one of the defendants, who had testified that 
her husband was not present and had no part in the shooting, was 
challenged as a witness and impeached, her testimony discredited, and 
her husband convicted for want of her evidently candid testimony : 
but true or not, the principle of infamy is the same a citizen on trial 
for his liberty was refused the benefit of evidence under this damnable 
statute, and he and his wife made outlaws refused "the equal pro- 
tection of the law"! In Maryland, later in the same year 1929, a 
chicken-thief, caught in the act of robbery by the owner, was dis- 
charged in court because the owner of the property, a Freethinker, 
was not permitted under the infamous similar statute of that godly 
State to give testimony in court against the criminal : the case would 
have been the same, if the life or liberty of the Infidel citizen had been 
at stake, he was an outlaw denied the "equal protection of the law" ! 
The benighted State of Arkansas ("Now laugh!") declares in- 
famously in its Constitution: "No person who denies the being of a 
God shall hold any office in the civil government of this State, nor "be 
competent to testify as a witness in any court"! (Const. Ark., Art. 
XIX, sec. 26.) Under this accursed act of outlawry, Charles Lee 
Smith, of New York City, a native of Arkansas, went to his home city 
of Little Rock in the Fall of 1928 to oppose the degrading proposition 
proposed as a law in a popular initiative election, forbidding the 
teaching of Evolution in the State-supported schools and universities ; 
he made some remarks reflecting upon the personal integrity of the 
Almighty, as well as denying his existence; twice was he arrested, 
thrown into jail, convicted, and was denied the right to testify as a 
witness in his own behalf ; he is today on bail to answer to the decision 
of the Supreme Court of that State, an outlaw, denied the "equal pro- 
tection of the law" of the land 1 The hypocrisy and self -stultification 
imposed by such detestable laws, is finely illustrated: At the recent 
annual meeting of the American Law Institute, I denounced this 
Article to a leader of the Arkansas Bar, and appealed to him to 
"start something" to get rid of it. He shrugged his shoulders, smiled 
in sympathy, and said : "It is in the Constitution, and too difficult to 
get it out." Then, dropping into Spanish, so that others at the table 
might not understand, he added : "Yo no creo nada, y no digo nada 
I believe nothing and I say nothing" ! While these infamies are in- 


flicted upon the citizens of this country by law imposed by a bigoted 
and ignorant minority of superstitious parsons and their docile dupes ; 
aye, even if imposed by an overwhelming majority, or by authentic 
decree of God himself, the free and fearless defiers of Church and 
despisers of its Superstition will fight it on to the death, till every 
trace of these infamies is purged out of the statute books of these 
sovereign States ! This is due and solemn notice and defiance to the 
intolerant religious oppressors and their deluded dupes. 

Medieval laws against the fictitious crime of "Blasphemy" survive 
in a dozen American States, protecting by law the Christian super- 
stition of the old Hebrew God. A model of them all is this infamous 
enactment of the Church-ridden Massachusetts: "Whoever wilfully 
blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeli- 
ously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of 
the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ 
or the Holy Ghost [the whole Divine Family], or by cursing or 
contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt or ridicule, the 
holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished 
by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by fine of not 
more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good be- 
havior." (Gen. Laws Mass., 1921; Chap. 272, sec. 36.) Expressed 
contempt is held in lighter pecuniary estimation in the Yankee "Nut- 
meg State," the fine being only $100.00, plus the year in gaol. (Gen. 
Stat. Com,., 1918, sec. 6395.) In both States, under these infamous 
laws, persons have been indicted, tried and convicted within the past 
two years ! Throughout the Union are odious religious statutes, "Blue 
Laws" 1 and Sunday Laws, penalizing innocuous diversions and activi- 
ties of the people on days of religious Voodoo : Sunday, as we shall 
see, being a plagiarization from the religion of Mithras, and created 
a secular holiday not a religious Holy Day by law of the Pagan 
Constantine. Such laws sometimes prove troublesome to the pious 
Puritans themselves ; an amusing instance of their boomerang effect 
being now chronicled to the annoyed and sneering world. Some "400" 
of the True Believers of the "Holy Name Society" of St. Peter's R. C. 
Church of New Brunswick, in the saintly State of New Jersey, includ- 
ing several City "Fathers" stuck their legs under the loaded tables of 
the local hostlery for a "Holy Communion Breakfast' 5 the past Sun- 



day ; as they began to eat they discovered to their pious dismay that 
there was no bread on the tables, although the reservation had long 
before been made, with particular stress on a special brand of rolls, 
made only in the godless town of Newark. Consternation reigned, with 
much confusion and hurried telephoning by the management. In the 
midst of it came a 'phone call from the driver of the roll-delivery truck, 
from the local Hoosgow : "I've been arrested for the violation of sec- 
tion 316 of the Laws of 1798, which prohibits the delivery of bread 
and rolls on the Sabbath and also forbids a man to kiss his wife on 
that day" ! Some of the sachems called the chief of police and angrily 
demanded that this holy law be violated by delivering the blessed rolls ; 
the driver was arraigned before the Recorder, who "released him with 
a warning," and he consummated the violation by delivering the for- 
bidden rolls to the angry Holy Namers. (Herald-Trzbunc, May 14, 

Now, throughout the State, and in far off Ohio, at the instigation 
of the parsons, these pestiferous pious laws are being forced into en- 
forcement, headlined "Blue Law Net Busy in Jersey," and recorded : 
"Hundreds of names and addresses were in the possession of the police 
today because their owners played golf, tennis or radios, bought or 
sold gasoline, cigarettes or groceries, or operated trolley cars, busses 
or trains in this capital city (of Trenton) on the Sabbath," with 
much more of detail ; and in the same column, a dispatch from Dover, 
Ohio, that the police used tear-gas bombs to dislodge the operator 
from the projection-box of a local "movie" theater, who, with the 
owner and four employees, was "arrested for violation of the Sunday 
closing law"! (N. Y. Sun, May 26, 1930.) And all this medieval ab- 
surdity of repressive penal legislation to enforce obsolete religious 
observance by disbelievers, in a land whose every constitution pro- 
claims the complete separation of State and Church ! But for the de- 
fiance of fearless heroes of Rationalism who have through the ages 
contended, and suffered martyrdom by rack and stake in defense of 
human liberty, rack and stake and fiendish torture would yet be the 
penalty, rather than fine and jail, for violators of the odious proscrip- 
tions of Church and Church-minded, Church-driven, politicians. To 
know fully the insidious and intensive efforts being made throughout 
our country by the dupes of priestcraft to undermine and destroy the 


liberties and rights of free men in the interest of canting religious 
Pharisaism, bent on rule and ruin, every true friend of freedom and 
enemy of the Church, should read intently and keep ever at hand for 
an arsenal of defense, Maynard Shipley's stirring book, The War on 
'Modern Science; A Short History of the Fundamentalist Attacks on 
Evolution and Modernism (Knopf, 1929), which to read doth 
"make the angry passions rise" in righteous wrath against these pious 
conspirators against American liberties and the innate rights of man. 
The Church, too, through the ages has been and yet nefariously is 
"in politics, 5 ' seeking to dictate and dominate and impose its malign 
superstitions by law : witness the two last presidential campaigns, and 
the pernicious activities of the Methodist Board of Intolerance, Med- 
dling and Public Nuisance, as now being revealed by the Lobbying In- 
vestigation Committee of the United States Senate, whereby it is 
shown seeking to suborn and subordinate all to its intolerant super- 
stitious dominance. In most European countries the True Church 
maintains its blatant "Catholic Party 5 ' in the elections and in the 
parliaments ; here its operations are via the "grape-vine route, 5 ' but 
effective, as through the corrupt machinations of St. Tammany; 
while the Methodist Party and the Baptist Party, and their allies the 
Ku Klux Klan pursue the same evil ends through vocal frightening of 
cheap politicians and of large sections of the people and press. The 
very pious Editor of the Christian Herald has just published a book 
on "The Church in Politics," in which with cynical frankness he 
asserts its right and discloses its odious methods. 

These odious things are all the work and blighting effects of the 
unholy Odwm Theologicum of Priestcraft, poisoning men's minds 
with the rancors of obsolete superstitious beliefs. 

Remove the cause, the cure is automatically and quickly effected. 
To contribute to the speedier consummation of this supreme boon is 
the motive and justification of this book. It gives to the unctuous 
quack "Doctors of Divinity" a copious dose out of their own nauseous 
Pharmacopaeia of Priestly Mendacity. As its takes its deadly effect 
upon themselves, haply their "incurably religious" duped patients 
may begin to evidence hopeful symptoms of a wholesome, speedy and 
complete cure from their priest-made malady. 

"Fraud," says Ingersoll, "is hateful to its victims." The compelling 



proofs of duplicious fraud of priestcraft and Church exposed in this 
book must convince even the most credulous and devout Believer, that 
the system of "revealed religion" which he "drew in with his mother's 
milk' 5 and has in innocent ignorance suffered in his system ever since, 
is simply a veneered Paganism, unrevealed and untrue; is a huge 
scheme of priestly imposture to exploit the credulous and to live in 
power and wealth at his expense. Luther hit the bull's-eye of the Sys- 
tem before he established another to pass the same old counterfeit : 
The Church exists mostly for wealth and self-aggrandizement ; to quit 
paying money to the priests would kill the whole scheme in a couple of 
years. This is the sovereign remedy. Let him that hath ears to hear, 
hear; and govern himself accordingly. Every awakened Believer must 
feel outraged in his dignity and self-respect, and in disgust must re- 
pudiate the Creed and its impostors. 

When a notorious Criminal is arraigned at the bar of Justice and 
put to trial for deeds of crime and shame, it is his crimes, his criminal 
career and record, which are the subject of inquiry, which are ex- 
posed and denounced for conviction. No weight in attenuation is 
accorded to sundry sporadic instances (if any) between crimes 
or as cloaks for crime of his canting piety and gestures of benevo- 
lence towards his victims, the dupes of his duplicity. Thus the Church 
and its Creed are here arraigned on their record of Crime, "extenu- 
ating naught, naught setting down in malice"; simply exposing 
truly its own convicting record and confessions of its criminality, for 
condign judgment upon it. 

Goliath of Gath was a very big Giant ; but a small pebble, artfully 
slung, brought him to a sudden and violent collapse, a huge corpse. 
This TNT. bomb of a book, loaded with barbed facts, is flung full m 
facia ecclesice into the face of the Forgery-founded Church and all 
her discordant broods. The "gates of hell" will be exploded! 

But yesteryear the Church of God in might 
Has stood against the world; now lief she here, 
And none so poor to do her reverence! 


New York City 
780 Riverside Drive 
June 1, 1930 


Foreword: vii 





FAITH 123 




INDEX Fottows page 406 


"Being crafty, I caught you with guile" . . . 
"For if the truth of God hath more abounded 
through my LIE unto hi$ glory; why yet am 
I also adjudged a sinner?" 

St. Paul. 

"What profit has not that fable of Christ 
brought us!' 9 

Pope Leo X. 



"Neither in the confusion of paganism, nor in the defilement of heresy, 
nor yet in the blindness of Judaism, is religion to be sought, but among 
those alone who are called Catholic Christians." (St. Augustine, De Vera 
ReUgione, v.) 

EVERY EEUGION, PRIEST CRAffT, and Sacred Book, other than the 
Roman Catholic Christian, is thus branded as false in fact and 
fraudulent in practice. The Jews, however, excluded by those 
who have expropriated their ancient faith, make the same imputations 
of falsity and fraud against the Christian religion, based on their own 
ancient sacred Scriptures, and founded, as the Christians claim, by a 
Jewish Incarnation of the Hebrew God, which, say the Jews, is a 
horrid blasphemy ; and they brand the Sacred Books of Christian ori- 
gin as false and forged. 

The Christians, all their hundreds of warring Sects, in their turn 
impute to the Jews the blasphemous repudiation and monstrous 
murder of the Son of the ancient Hebrew God, Yahveh; and with 
ample usury of blood and torture have visited that fabulous iniquity 
upon the hapless sons and daughters of Jewry unto half a hundred 
generations of "God's Chosen People." 

But, of the countless Sects of Christians, one alone, it avers, is of 
the True Faith ; all the others are false and beyond the hope of heaven : 
"Whoever will be saved, it is necessary above all else that he hold to 
the Catholic Faith," so reads the venerable forged Athanasian 
Creed. (CE. ii, 33, 34.) The Protestant Sects, however, though they 
all admit the same origin and accept in full fatuity of faith most of 
the same forged sacred writings for their rule of faith as the One True 
Church, yet apply the scornful epithet "Antichrist" to their venerable 


Mother in Christ ; freely dub a dozen of her canonical sacred Books of 
Jewish origin, and most of her thousands of canonized Saints, for- 
geries and frauds ; and assert many of her most holy dogmas and sac- 
raments to be blasphemous and degrading superstitions. The while 
their own scores of hostile factions mutually recriminate each the 
others as blind leaders of the blind and perverters of the sacred Truth. 
It will serve a useful purpose to take a look behind all this dust- 
and-smoke screen of "Odium Theologicum" and make a brief survey 
of the origins of religious superstitions and priestcraft, and of the 
known and admitted falsities and frauds of Paganism, and some ven- 
erable other religious Isms. This will demonstrate that these same 
things are now part and parcel of Christianity. This induces the in- 
quiry, Wherein the data of Christianity as a whole may haply differ 
from the admitted frauds of the false religions and priestcrafts of the 
Past. We shall learn whether and to what degree truth may be found 
in any of the confused and confusing Christian claims of Truth. 


"There is no origin for the idea of an after-life save the conclusion 
which the savage draws from the notion suggested by dreams/ 1 Herbert 

JLo 9 the poor Indian, with his untutored mind, aw his god in clouds 
and heard him in the wind. Ages before him, the Dawn-man* the ear- 
liest Cave-man, saw his shadow in the un t his reflection in the water, 
and crudely thought that ho had a Kort of shadowy double, which ac- 
companied him and at times showed itself visible to him* At n Jght, when 
the Dawn-man, gorged with raw and often putrid fleh t in a night- 
mare dream saw terrible monsters assailing him, or in more normal 
sleep wandered forth and visited distant scenes of his previoun roam- 
ings, or saw, as in the flesh living and acting before his eyes, hi* dead 
father or friend, thus he got further immature notion* of a double, 
"ka," or detachable spirit of man, dwelling within him, which could 
leave the body and return at will, or which survived the death of the 
body and lived on in spirit form, and could revisit the old habitation 
and hold converse with, do good or harm to, the frightened living. 
Thus came the belief in the existence and survival after death of this 


double or spirit-ghost ; thus the notion of the immortality of the soul, 
a primitive belief held by every people of antiquity, and surviving yet 
by inheritance among the priest-taught of modern times. 

These strange phantoms of the night naturally worked further 
upon the fear-filled mind of the early child-men, terrified by the 
frightful vicissitudes of life, the violent deaths by wild animals, the 
storms and floods that killed and maimed them, the lightnings and 
thunders that terrified them. All these things were to them clearly 
the manifestations of the anger and revenge of the departed spirits, 
especially of the Old Man of the clan who had bossed it in life and 
had grudges against all who had not been sufficiently obedient to him. 
Awaking from these dread visions of the night, the frightened Dawn- 
man would relate the uncanny visitations to his fellows, who would 
have like ghostly dream-stuff to exchange ; together they would wonder 
whether something could be done to propitiate or placate the wander- 
ing ghost-men and to win their favor for benefits to be had from 
their superior other-worldly status and powers. 

It could not be long before some old and crafty member of the no- 
madic clan would hint that he had known the Old Man well during life, 
had been very friendly with him living and had a powerful influence 
with him ; that he was wise to the ways and whims of ghosts or gods ; 
and no doubt he could get in touch with his spirit and cajole him into 
reasonableness and favor. This suggestion meeting with awed ac- 
quiescence, it would quickly be followed by the forthright bold claim 
to super-ghostly powers, and by sundry weird mumblings and mystic 
rites and incantations the old faker would further awe the clan into 
credulous faith in the claim. The new spiritualist would pretend to get 
into communion with the Old Man's spirit, and to receive from him 
"revelations" of his will and commands for the obedience of the clan. 
Thus began spirit-worship or religion the fancied relations between 
man and the spirits of the dead or gods. Here, too, we have the first 
shaman, medicine-man, magician, witch-doctor, or what-not; in a 
word, the first priest ; and the priestly game was on. The pretended 
ghost-cajoler would naturally be held in dread awe and reverence by 
his credulous dupes, and would gain enormous respect and prestige ; 
he could quit the drudgery of hunting and fishing for his precarious 
living, and let the awed and believing members of the clan keep him 


in food and idle ease : here the first social parasite. This is priestcraft 
by whatever name and in whatever age and guise pursued. 

A very modern instance comes to hand and is added for confirma- 
tion. Fortunately, or lamentably for Christian pretensions, there yet 
exist in the world races of very primitive descendants of Adam, who 
yet preserve their primeval forms of superstition and priestcraft, 
wherein may be seen their origins in yet active reality of operation* 
In no more remote a region of these our United States than the Dio- 
mede Islands of the Aleutian archipelago of Alaska, tribal supersti- 
tion and primitive priestcraft may be seen in all their ridiculous cru- 
dity today. In the Report of the Stoll-McCraclcen Expedition of the 
American Museum of Natural History, 1928, primitive religious su- 
perstition and the power of the priest are graphically described ; with 
simple change of form and ritual it is Religion through the Ages, 
the war-blessers and rain-makers in action to cajole and control the 
deity through his priests. As one reads- the following extracts from 
the Report, let him see what differences he may discover, other than 
of technique, between the Diomeder and the Dupe of any other Cult. 
"For the Diomeder humbles himself before the imaginary forces of 
his spirit world, often disregarding the realities of life with typical 
primitive inconsistency. . . . The only powers really worthy of his 
respect are the supernatural ones. This is why the Eskimo medicine 
man, or angutkok, as he is called, holds a position of such influence* He 
is the middleman between the natural and supernatural world. The 
Diomeders have no real chiefs or any system of government. Each 
family is able to manage its own affairs. The common events of life 
take care of themselves. But whatever is unusual, whatever cannot be 
readily understood, engages the attention of every Diomeder. Such 
things as sickness and weather, good or bad luck and the complicated 
workings of nature fascinate him because they are utterly beyond 
his comprehension. Indeed, superstition is the basis of the angutkok*s 
hold over his people. It is chiefly for his supposed alliance with the 
forces of the supernatural that he is venerated. ... He is supposed 
to have marvellous powers over bodily ailments. . . . The power of 
conversation with the ancestral spirits is one of the angutkok's strong- 
est holds upon his public. For the ancestral spirits are said to exert 
a tremendous influence over the lives of the natives. The Diomeder*s 

attitude toward them is more than one of wholesome respect. It is 
made up of a definite and deep-seated fear. This is because the spirits, 
if they choose, can send down either good luck or bad and usually 
elect the latter. And clever must be the ruses whereby they may be 
tricked into benignity. For a departed soul, no matter how kindly has 
been its earthly owner, is a potential agent of misfortune and must 
be treated accordingly." (New York Times Magazine, Dec. 16, 1928, 
p. 9.) The methods of incantation, of placating the spirits and gods, 
the charms and amulets used for these conjurations, differ only in 
material from those in holy vogue today in some very Chris- 
tian countries. Angutkok, shaman, medicine-man, exerciser, priest, 
Pennsylvania Witch-doctors, nature-fakers and superstition-mongers, 
parasites preying on ignorance and fear the whole genealogy of 
dupe-craft, of priest-craft, what difference in kind and craft is dis- 
cernible between the one and the others of the god-placating, devil- 
chasing Genus Shamanensis? Bombarding the irate god with eggs, as 
with the Diomedes, or by the prayer of faith as with more up-to-date 
God-compellers, the cause is the same, and the effect is equally ineffec- 
tive and desultory. 

The Catholic Encyclopedia, describing the Doctors of Divinity 
as in vogue among sundry African tribes, well describes the entire 
confraternity in all religions: "Certain specialists, however, exist, 
known to us as sorcerers, witch-doctors, etc. who are familiar with 
the mysterious secrets of things, who make use of them on behalf of 
those interested, and hand them down to chosen disciples." (CE. i, 
183.) One of the highest and most potent functions of all these primi- 
tive shamans and devil-doctors is the conjuring of the infinitude of 
devils which afflict the inner-works of the superstitious, and work 
havoc in weather, crops, herds, etc. ; the practice and its ceremonial of 
incantation are very elaborate in some modern schemes : "This cere- 
mony takes up over thirty pages of the Roman Ritual. It is, however, 
but rarely used [in these more enlightened and skeptical days], and 
never without the express permission of the Bishop, for there is room 
for no end of deception and hallucination when it is a question of deal- 
ing with the unseen powers"! (CE. i, 142). Thus the System is yet in 
vogue; and its priestcraft has waxed very powerful and very 
wealthy. Artificial Fear and Credulity are its sole source and sus- 



tenance. As the Roman poet Lucretius said: "Fear was the first thing 
on earth to make gods." 

Reinach, after a critique of many varied definitions of Religion, 
thus formulates his own which a moment's reflection upon the infinite 
sacred "Thou Shalt Not's" of Faith will fuUy justify: "A sum of 
scruples (Taboos) which impede the free exercise of our faculties/' 
(Orpheus, 1930 ed. p. 3.) 

As primitive society progressed towards organization, the Head- 
man of the clan or tribe would find advantage in a close and not dis- 
interested association with the Shaman, whose intimations of good 
from the spirits or dreadful evil would assist powerfully in the sub- 
ordination and control of maybe otherwise ambitious or unruly sub- 
jects : thus began the cooperation of ruler and priest for the subjection 
of the ruled. Later yet, as government and priestcraft developed, the 
ruler was also priest or the priest ruler, as in early Egypt and As- 
syria, and as in ancient theocratic Israel before the Kings and after 
the return from Captivity. So too, later, in Greece and Rome. In 
Egypt and under the Empire in Rome the King was God, in Egypt 
by divine descent, in Rome by apotheosis. Even Alexander of Macedon 
was a god by divine generation, as declared by the Pagan Oracle of 
Jupiter Ammon, to the great scandal of Alexander's mother Olympias, 
who was wont to complain, "I wish that Alexander would cease from 
incessantly embroiling me with the wife of Jupiter !" Thus priestcraft 
thrived and gained immense dominion over the superstitious minds of 
men, to say nothing of powers and prestige unlimited, privileges, im- 
munities, wealth and aggrandizement beyond rivalry in ancient 
Pagan times. 

The temples of the ancient gods throughout Pagandom were mar- 
vels of sumptuous wealth and beauty, thanks to the lavish munificence 
of rulers and the offerings of the votaries of the respective false gods. 
The Temple of Diana at Ephesus, the Parthenon or Temple of the 
Virgin-goddess at Athens, were wonders of the ancient world. The 
greatest ruins of antiquity yet standing in splendid ruin or unearthed 
by the excavations of the archeologists, are the temples of the Pagan 
gods, testifying in their decayed grandeur to their pristine magnifi- 
cence and wealth. 

Through the priests and the fear of the gods the rulers ruled: 


"Thus saith our god" was the awful sanction of their commands and 
of their legal enactments. The Hebrews had no word for "religion"; 
their nearest approximation to the idea is the oft-repeated Bible 
phrase, "The fear of Yahveh [the Lord]." The ancient Code of Ham- 
murabi, graven on the stela discovered by De Morgan in the ruins of 
Susa at the beginning of this century and now preserved in the Louvre 
at Paris, represents the King humbly receiving the Code of Laws from 
the great god Bel through the Sun-god Shamash ; this for its greater 
sanction to obedience by the superstitious people, who knew no better 
than to believe the pious fraud of the priests and Bang. A thousand 
years more or less later, the Hebrew God Yahveh, along with many 
divine laws, delivered to Moses his Code of Commandments neatly 
scratched with his own finger on two stone slabs ; of these, like the 
grave of Moses, no man knoweth the whereabouts unto this day. It 
was plain but pious fraud for Hammurabi to issue his laws under the 
name of his god. Common sense and common honesty make us disbelieve 
and condemn the Hammurabi fraud, and no one chides us for disbeliev- 
ing it. Perforce we must believe the Moses-tale of identical import, or 
be dubbed atheists, reviled and ostracized, and be damned in the Chris- 
tian Hell forever, to boot. Both fables of Divine enactment were in- 
vented for and served the same purpose to dupe the credulous to be- 
lieve and obey King and Priest. Is it honest? 

This principle, involved in the pretense of divine sanctions, and ef- 
fective through the cooperation of King and Priest for dominion over 
the ruled, was frankly recognized by many ancient writers, and even 
by some lauded as salutary for the ignorant. Critias, friend of Soc- 
rates, saw the State "with false reason covering truth," which by this 
device "quenched lawlessness with laws." Diodorus Siculus admitted it 
to be the duty of the State "to establish eff ective gods to do the work of 
police," and laid it down, that "It is to the interest of States to be de- 
ceived in religion." Livy admires the wisdom of Numa, who "intro- 
duced the fear of the gods as a most efficacious means of controlling an 
ignorant and barbarous populace." Polybius, the celebrated Greek 
historian, gives his philosophic admiration to the religious system of 
the Romans as an effective means of government of the populace : 

"In my opinion their object is to use it as a check upon the common peo- 
ple. If it were possible to form a State wholly of philosophers, such a cus- 


torn would perhaps be unnecessary. But seeing that every multitude is 
fickle and full of lawless desires^ unreasoning anger and violent passions, 
the only recourse is to keep them in check by mysterious terrors and scenic 
effects of this sort. Wherefore, to my mind, the ancients were not acting 
without purpose or at random, when they brought in among the Vulgar 
those opinions about the gods and the belief in the punishments in Hades." 
(Histories, quoted by Glover, The Conflict of Religions in the Early 
Roman Empire, pp. 3-4.) 

This pious notion of God and religion as the Big Policeman of the 
common herd, is not yet extinct. The Attorney General of England, in 
a celebrated State trial for the sale of a copy of Thomas Paine's The 
Age of Reason, urged to the jury the necessity "to prevent its circula- 
tion among the industrious poor" ; for, he declaimed, "Of all human 
beings they stand most in need of the consolations of religion ; . , . 
because no man can be expected to be faithful to the authority of 
man who revolts against the government of God"! (Williams 9 Case, 
26 Howard's State Trials, p. 719; 1798-99.) But times and creeds 
change; this is the Twentieth century. The professional religionists 
of today, however, forever dingdong the old "Morality Lie," that 
without the God-given Ten Commandments and like divine laws, min- 
istered by them and reenacted and enforced by the State there can 
be no morality, no human virtues, no decent government. The "True 
Church" makes mighty boast of its "saving civilization" after the 
Fall of Rome by the industrious preachment as we shall amply see 
of pious lies and practice of most unholy frauds among the semi- 
pagan Christian peoples who rose despite the Church on the ruins 
of Rome, 

"... Whilst human kind 
Throughout the lands lay miserably crushed 
Before all eyes beneath Religion who 
Would show her head along the region skies, 
Glowering on mortals with her hideous face." 

(Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, I.) 


At the time of the advent of "that newer form of Paganism later 
called Christianity," the Graeco-Roman world seethed with religions 
in a great state of flux and re-formation. Wonder-workers, miracle- 


mongers, impostors in the guise of gods and Christs abounded. Simon 
Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Apuleius, Alexander, Porphyry, lam- 
blichus, performed prodigies of divine power and were hailed as 
genuine gods, just as were Paul and Barnabas (Acts xiv, 11-12), 
and, later, Jesus the Christ. Of these Pagan and Jewish "Christs" 
two will be briefly noted, for their very important Christian contacts 
and analogies. But first, some analogies of Pagan priestly f akeries. 

The petty frauds of the Pagan priests to dupe their credulous 
votaries would fill a large book ; the ancient poets and philosophers, 
and modern histories of Gentilic religions, abound in instances. Sim- 
ply for examples of a few of the more common frauds of the Pagan 
priests, outdone a thousand-fold by the Christian priests and Church, 
as (out of the Catholic Encyclopedia) we shall see, we may men- 
tion some well-known pious frauds of the Greeks and Romans prev- 
alent around the beginning of the Christian era and forming the re- 
ligious atmosphere of the times in which the new faith was born and 

False prophecies and miracles and fraudulent relics were the chief 
reliance among the Pagans, as among the Christians, for stimulating 
the faith, or credulity, of the ignorant and superstitious masses. The 
images of the gods were believed to be endowed with supernatural 
power. Of some, the wounds could bleed; of others, the eyes could 
wink; of others, the heads could nod, the limbs could be raised; the 
statues of Minerva could brandish spears, those of Venus could weep ; 
others could sweat ; paintings there were which could blush. The Holy 
Crucifix of Boxley, in Kent, moved, lifted its head, moved its lips and 
eyes ; it was broken up in London, and the springs exposed, and shown 
to the deriding public ; but this relation is out of place, this was a 
pious Christian, not Pagan, fake. One of the marvels of many cen- 
turies was the vocal statue of Memnon, whose divine voice was heard 
at the first dawn of day, "the sweet voice of Memnon" which greeted 
the sun, as sung by poets and attested by inscriptions on the statue 
made by noted visitors, who credited the assertion of the priests that 
the voice was that of the god Ammon ; the secret was discovered by 
Wilkinson: a cavity in which a priest was concealed, who struck a 
stone at sunrise when the worshippers were assembled, thus giving out 
a melodious ringing sound. Very famous was the Palladium or statue 



of Minerva, thrown down from heaven by Zeus into Troy, and guarded 
sacredly in the citadel as protection of the city, which was believed to 
be impregnable so long as the statue was in the city ; Ulysses and 
Diomede entered the city in disguise and stole out the sacred statue 
to the Greek camp ; thence JSneas is said to have taken it to Italy, 
where it was preserved in the Temple of Vesta. Many cities of Greece 
and Rome claimed to have the genuine original. Another miraculous 
statue of like, divine origin was that of "the great goddess, Diana" at 
Ephesus, which the Townclerk (in Acts xix, 35) declared that all men 
knew "fell down from Jupiter." Other holy relics galore were pre- 
served and shown to the pious : The JEgis of Jove, forged by Vulcan 
and ornamented with the head of the Gorgon; the very tools with 
which the Trojan horse was made, at Metapontum; the sceptre of 
Pelops, at Chaeronea ; the spear of Achilles, at Pharselis ; the sword 
of Memnon, at Nicomedia ; the hide of the Chalcydonian boar, among 
the Tegeates ; the stone bearing the authentic marks of the trident of 
Neptune, at Athens ; the Cretans exhibited the tomb of Zeus, which 
earned for them their reputation as Liars. But Mohammedans show 
the tomb of Adam and Christians that of Peter !' There were endless 
shrines and sanctuaries at which miracle-cures could be performed : 
oracular temples- full of caverns, and secret passages, that of the 
Cumaean Sibyl has recently been explored, and its fraudulent devices 
exposed. The gods themselves came down regularly and ate the fine 
feasts spread before their statues. In the apocryphal History of Bel 
and the Dragon, interpolated in the True Church's Book of Daniel 
(Chapter xiv), the Holy Ghost tells how this hero trapped the priests 
who stole at night through secret passages into the throne-room of the 
god and ate the good things furnished by the pious King and people. 
The gods came frequently to earth, too, and with the connivance of 
the priests kept amorous tryst in the temples with unsuspecting pious 
ladies, edifying instances of which are related by Herodotus and 
Josephus, among other chroniclers of the wiles of priestcraft. 

Pagan prodigies of every conceivable kind were articles of popular 
credulity, affecting the commonalty as well as many of the highest 
category. The great Emperor Augustus, obedient to dreams, went 
begging money through the streets of Rome, and used to wear the 
skin of a seacalf to protect himself against lightning. Tiberius placed 

greater faith in the efficacy of laurel leaves ; both remedies are highly 
praised by Pliny. Caligula would crawl under the bed in thunder 
storms ; the augurs had listed eleven kinds of lightning with different 
significations. Comets and dreams portended the gravest crises. Cicero 
and Valerius Maximus cite numerous instances of dreams being verified 
by the event. Livy relates with perfect faith innumerable prodigies, 
though he acutely observed, that "the more prodigies are believed, the 
more they are announced. 5 ' The Emperors made numerous enact- 
ments against sorcery, divination, and all kinds of magic ; the "Chris- 
tian 5 * Emperor, Constantine, prohibited all forms of magic, but spe- 
cially excepted and authorized "that which was intended to avert hail 
and lightning, 55 one of the specialties of the Christian priests. Such 
puerilities of the prevalent superstitions might be multiplied to fill 
volumes. (See case, Experiences with the Supernatural, etc.) 


Apollonius of Tyana was one of the most notable of these wonder- 
working Christs. So extremely moral and pure were his doctrines and 
his conduct, and so mighty the works he wrought, that the Pagans 
insisted that Apollonius was the actual personage whom the Chris- 
tians called Jesus Christ. By all reports, implicitly credited, Apol- 
lonius had raised the dead, healed the sick, cast out devils, freed a 
young man from a lamia or vampire with whom he was enamored, 
prophesied, seen in one country events which were occurring in an- 
other, as from Ephesus the assassination of Domitian at Rome, and 
had filled the world with the fame of his miracles and of his sanctity, 
just as did Jesus Christ. Apollonius was born about the same time as 
Jesus of Nazareth; the legends of their lives and deeds were very 
similar; the former, at least, has been justly described as "among 
that least obnoxious class of impostors, who pretend to be divinely 
gifted, with a view to secure attention and obedience to precepts, 
which, delivered in the usual way, would be generally neglected. 5 ' 
(Anthon, Classical Dictionary, p. 165: see generally, Lecky, Hist, 
of European Morals, i, 372, passim; any good Encyclopedia.) Recall 
the current histories of Mohammed, the Mormon Joseph Smith, 
Mother Eddy Jesus Christ for instances of analogous pretensions. 

This customary pretense of wonder-workers is confirmed by the 


great Church Father Lactantius, in his Divine Institutes, dedicated 
to the "Christian" Emperor Constantine, in which he combated the 
Pagan imputation that Jesus was a magician, like Apollonius and 
Apuleius, whose wonder-workings he admits. Like all the Fathers, as 
we shall see, Lactantius, an ex-Pagan, had firm faith in magic, and 
believed all the magical wonders of the Pagan magicians as veritable 
miracles wrought by the divine power of demons or devils. He says that 
the Pagans "endeavored to overthrow his [Jesus'] wonderful deeds 
[by showing] that Apollonius performed equal or even greater deeds/* 
But,"It is strange," he argues, "that he omitted to mention Apuleius, 
of whom many and wonderful things are accustomed to be re- 
lated. ... If Christ is a magician because He performed wonderful 
deeds, it is plain that Apollonius, who, according to your description, 
when Domitian wished to punish him, suddenly disappeared on his 
trial, was more skilful than He who was both arrested and crucified. 
... It was evident, therefore, that he [Apollonius] was both a man 
and a magician ; and for this reason he affected divinity under the title 
of a name belonging to another [Hercules], for in his own name he 
was unable to attain it" (Lact. Div. Inst. Bk. V, ch. iii; ANF* vii, 
138, 139.) 


Most notorious and important, from the viewpoint of the rising 
Christianity, was the Samaritan impostor, Simon Magus, the "great 
power of God," vouched for by divine inspiration as having "used 
sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria," he having "of a long 
time bewitched them with sorceries," as the Holy Ghost of God ri- 
diculously assures us in Acts viii. Not content with his own "great 
power of God," Simon, having seen some of the apostles at work be- 
stowing the Holy Ghost on the peasants, offered money for the gift 
of like power to himself, but was curtly rebuked and refused by Peter. 
The especial importance of Simon Magus is his legendary Scriptural 
contact with the fisherman Peter, which developed, under the early 
Christian propensity for expansive mendacity, into a veritable litera- 
ture of pious lies and prodigies associated with Simon and Peter, which 
was the chiefest if not sole basis, be it remembered, for the false pre- 

tense, later developed, as we shall duly see, of the "sojourn" of Peter 
at Rome as Bishop and Pope. As these legends of the Samaritan im- 
postor are wholly Christian impostures, the Catholic Encyclopedia 
will be called upon for an account of the Patristic canards. "By his 
magic arts," says our exponent of "Catholic Truth," Simon was called 
Magus, or the Magician; the account just given from Acts is "the 
sole authoritative [ ?] report that we have about him" ; and it confesses 
the chronic mendacity of the Fathers by the remark, "The statements 
of the [clerical] writers of the second century concerning him are 
largely legendary, and it is difficult or rather impossible to extract 
from them any historical fact the details of which are established with 
certainty." Let us remember this characterization of these same Fa- 
therly writers, who, lying about Simon and Peter together, in Rome, 
yet tell unvarnished truth about Peter alone, or Peter and Paul to- 
gether, in Rome. 

I may remark, that serious argument is made, that Paul himself is 
maliciously intended by some of the Fathers under the name of Simon, 
the constant conflict between Paul and Peter being disguised under 
the accounts of the inveterate struggles of Simon and Peter. (See 
Encyc. Bib. vol. iv, Art. Simon Magus.) The childish and fabulous 
histories of the Fathers regarding Simon and Peter and Paul in Rome 
and their contests of magic powers, are thus related: 

"St. Justin of Rome ('First Apolog.' xxvi, Ivi ; 'Dialog, c. Tryphonem* 
cxx), describes Simon as a man who, at the instigation of demons* claimed 
to be a god. Justin says further that Simon came to Rome during the reign 
of the Emperor Claudius and by his magic arts won many followers so 
that these erected on an island in the Tiber a statue to him as a divinity 
with the inscription 'Simon the Holy God.' The statue, however, that Jus- 
tin took for one dedicated to Simon was undoubtedly one to the old Sabine 
divinity Semo Sancus (797) . . . The later anti-heretical writers who 
report Simon's residence at Rome, take Justin and the apocryphal Acts of 
Peter as their authority, so that their testimony is of no value, [p. 
793.] . . . 

"Simon plays an important part in the 'Pseudo-Clementines.' He appears 
here as the chief antagonist of the Apostle Peter, by whom he is every- 
where followed and opposed. The alleged magical arts of the magician 
and Peter's efforts against him are described in a way that is absolutely 
imaginary. The entire account lacks all historical basis [citing several 



works]. . . . The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter give an entirely different 
account of Simon's conduct at Rome and of his death. In this work also 
great stress is laid upon the struggle between Simon and the Apostles 
Peter and Paul at Home. By his magic arts Simon had also sought to win 
the Emperor Nero for himself, an attempt in which he had been thwarted 
by the apostles. As proof of the truth of his doctrines Simon offered to 
ascend into the heavens before the eyes of Nero and the Roman populace; 
by magic he did rise in the air in the Roman Forum, but the prayers of the 
Apostles Peter and Paul caused him to fall, so that he was severely in- 
jured and shortly afterwards died miserably. . . . This legend led later 
to the erection of a church dedicated to the apostles on the alleged spot of 
Simon's fall near the Via Sacra above the Forum. The stones of the pave- 
ment on which the apostles knelt in prayer and which are said to contain 
the impression of their knees, are now in the wall of the Church of Santa 
Francesca Romana" (CE. xiii, 797, 798.) 

With respect to that statue erected in the Tiber to "Simon the 
Holy God," the account, above mentioned, does not do justice to 
Father Justin's invention ; it is thus explicit : he says that Simon "per- 
formed feats of magic by demonic arts in Rome during the reign of 
Claudius, was held to be a god, and was honored by Senate and People 
with a statue in the middle of the Tiber, between the two bridges, bear- 
ing the inscription in Latin: 'Simoni, Deo sancto. * . . To Simon 
the holy God.' The base of the pillar referred to was dug up on the 
island in the Tiber, at the place indicated by Justin, in 1574 ; the in- 
scription, which was deciphered, runs : *Semoni Sanco deo fidio sacrum 
. . . Seoe.Pompewbs . . . dowm dedit. 9 Thus the pillar was dedicated 
to the Sabine god Semo Sancus, and not by the Senate and People, but 
by the piety of a private individual." (EB. iv, 4538-9 ; cf. CE. xiii, 
797-8.) The same authority, referring to the clerical fabrications 
above mentioned, says : "The Pseudo-Clementine Homilies and Rec- 
ognitions contain yet another element of the very greatest importance. 
In them Simon displays features which are unquestionably derived 
from Paul, and plainly show him to be a caricature of that apostle 
drawn by an unfriendly hand." (EB. iv, 4540, with citations in 
proof.) Simon proclaimed as his doctrine "asserting that none could 
possibly have salvation without being baptized in his name" (Tert. 
Adv. Hasreses, c. i; ANF. iii, 649) ; which group plagiarized the sen- 
timent from the other, Christians, or Simoneans, I cannot verify. 



The Pagans would appear almost to hare been good Christians : they 
had their gods, (whom they fondly called SaTiour and Messiah) ; the 
deaths and resurrections of gods ; devils, angels, and spirits good, bad 
and indifferent ; their heavens, hells and purgatories ; they believed in 
immortality of the soul, witness the Pyramids and the tombs of the 
Kings, as of Tut-ankh-Amen in Egypt, and of the Queen Shub-Ad, just 
unearthed in Ur of the Chaldees ; their elaborate sacrifices, animal 
and human, even of their dear little children to appease their gods, 
as in Carthage and Canaan, a chronic Hebrew practice. Virgin- 
births of demigods by the intervention of gods and human maids were 
common-places of Pagan faith, as were Virgin-mothers and god-child: 
the Christians imported theirs from Egypt the Madonna statues of 
Isis and the Child Horus of universal vogue at the beginning of this 
era of the Christ may be seen in almost any first-class Museum, as 
the Metropolitan in New York and the University in Philadelphia. 
This popular Pagan device, the "Mother of God" and her God-baby- 
in-arms, was taken over as a Christian sop to the crowds of Pagans 
who were being enticed and forced into the Church ; it was violently op- 
posed by many of the more intelligent Churchmen : "Nestorius [Bishop 
of Constantinople about 404] had declared against the new and, as 
he asserted, idolatrous expression 'Mother of God* (Theotokos), 
thereby opposing the sentiments cmd wishes of the humbler people" 
(CE. iii, 101) ; and in protest Nestorius left the Catholic Church and 
founded one of the most wide-spread and powerful '^heresies," which 
exists in the East to the present time. The Pagans had their holy mys- 
teries and sacraments, baptisms of water and of blood, communions 
with the gods at their sacred altars, partaking of sacred meals to in- 
gest the divine spirit and become godlike ; they believed in the resurrec- 
tion of the dead, and in final judgments meting rewards and punish- 
ments according to the deeds done in the flesh, the Egyptian Book 
of the Dead, 3000 years B, c., giving priestly prescriptions for use 
before the judgment seat of Osiris, is found in almost every tomb of 
those able to pay for the hieroglyphic papyrus rolls. The Pagans had 
their holy days (from which the Christians plagiarized their Christ- 


mas, Easter, Rogation Days, etc.) ; their monks, nuns, religious pro- 
cessions carrying images of idols (like those of saints today) ; incense, 
holy water, holy oil, chants, hymns, liturgies, confessions of sins to 
priests, forgiveness of sins by priests, revelations by gods to priests, 
prophecies, sacred writings of "holy bibles," Pontiffs, Holy Fathers, 
holy crafty priesthoods. All these sacrosanct things of Christian "Re- 
vealed Religion," were age-old pre-Christian Pagan myths and super- 

I puzzle myself to understand how there could be "divine revela- 
tions," to Jews and Christians, of things which for ages had been 
indentically ancient Pagan delusions and the inventions and common 
holy stock in trade of all Pagan priestcrafts. Indeed and in truth, 
there can be no divine revelation of miraculous "f acts" and "heavenly 
dogmas" which for centuries had been, and in the early Christian ages 
were, the current mythology of credulous Pagandom. This I shall 
make exceeding clear. 


This paragraph is one of the most important in this book, and to 
it I invite specially serious attention and thought. It will disclose the 
substantial identity of Christianity with the most popular and wide- 
spread "Pagan" religion of the times, Mithraism, or the Persian 
Zoroastrian religion, the closest and all but successful rival of Chris- 
tianity in the Roman world, and which might indeed have been suc- 
cessful, but that, soon after Constantine prostituted the Empire to 
the Church, "with the triumph of Christianity Mithraism came to 
a sudden end. The laws of Theodosius signed its death warrant. 5 * 
(CE. x, 402.) That there may be no suspicion that the recital of 
these remarkable identities of Christian "revelation" with Pagan in- 
ventions is fanciful or exaggerated, the tale shall be told in the quoted 
words of the Catholic Encyclopedia, which naively makes so many 
extraordinary admissions without seeming to be aware of their fatal 

"The essence of Revelation lies in the fact that it is the direct speech 
of God to man," says the Holy Ghost speaking through the Vatican 


Council (1870), thus confirming what I have above said, that "divine 
revelation" cannot be of Pagan myths already current and long known 
to everyone. The same Heavenly Instructor tells us what Revelation 
is : "Revelation may be defined as the communication of some truth 
by God to a rational creature through means which are beyond the 
ordinary course of nature. The truths thus revealed may be such as 
are otherwise inaccessible to the human mind mysteries, which even 
when revealed, the intellect of man is incapable of fully penetrating. 
. . . The Decree 'Lamentabili 5 (8 July, 1907) declares that the dog- 
mas which the Church proposes as revealed are 'truths which have 
come down to us from heaven 9 and not 'an interpretation of religious 
facts which the human mind has acquired by its own strenuous ef- 
forts.' " (Vatican Decrees, 1870; CE. xiii, 1.) And, asserts CE.: "The 
existence of revelation is as reasonably established as any historical 
fact"! (CE. xiii, 607.) Isn't CE. funny! 

Divine Revelation is thus of things not previously known and which 
the revelationless mind of man is incapable of acquiring or inventing 
by its own efforts. Divine Revelation rests thus upon the same princi- 
ple as the Law of Patents and Copyright. A book published, that is 
made known and given to the world cannot be the subject of subsequent 
copyright even by its author. When an application for a patent is, 
presented, the first act is to search the records to ascertain whether 
a similar art or article has ever previously been known and in use : if 
so, no patent can be obtained : the thing lacks novelty. So exactly with 
"revelation" : if some impostor or deluded person (e. g. Mohammed 
or Joseph Smith) claims that he has received a personal and there- 
fore necessarily private "revelation" from some god, the only wa$ 
whereby he can get a valid patent of authenticity and credibility for 
his "revelation/ 5 is to prove that its subject-matter has never before 
been known and in credulous circulation ; the moment that from the 
search of the records of other, or comparative religions, it is 
shown that the same proposition has been previously known and cur^ 
rent, in use and practice among some other priestcraft and its vo-J 
taries the thing is no revelation: the claim is a fraud. Let us seej 
how this indisputable rule works to the destruction and proof oil 
fraudulency of the "divine revelations" of Christian credulity. { 



The Religion of Zoroaster, known as Mithraism, is confessed by 
CE. to be a divinely revealed Monotheism, or worship of a One God, 
and having a divinely revealed Moral Code comparable to the Chris- 
tian, a sacred system claimed by Christians to be a monopoly of the 
Hebrew-Christian religion to the exclusion of all heathen systems. 
This notable confession reads : "The Avesta system may be best de- 
fined as MONOTHEISM, modified by a physical and moral dualism, 
with an ethical system based on a Divinely revealed moral code and 
human free will." (CE. ii, 156.) Though it quotes a Jesuit as saying: 
"Mithraism is the highest religious result to which human reason un- 
aided by Revelation, can attain." (Id.) Revealed or invented, it 
is virtually identical with Christianity ; but as the mythic Mithraic 
god could not "reveal" anything, the human reason which devised 
Mithraism was quite equal to the Christian God so far as devising 
mythology and ethics is an attribute of godhead. 

Mithraism is one of the oldest religious systems on earth, as it 
dates from the dawn of history before the primitive Iranian race di- 
vided into the sections which became Persian and Indian, as this same 
religion is contained both in the Persian Avesta and Indian Vedas. 
Thus its "revealed" or invented Monotheism by ages outdates the 
"revelation" of Yahveh to Moses ; and it is yet a living faith to some 
thousands of surviving Parsees : "The religious cult is [yet] scrupu- 
lously maintained as of old. The ancient traditional and nationally 
characteristic national virtues of truth and open-handed generosity 
flourish exceedingly in the small, but highly intelligent community" of 
Parsees in India. (CE. ii, 156.) 

The religion of Mithra anciently dominated Persia and the vast 
regions of the Orient ; it entered Europe following the conquests of 
Alexander the Great. When in 65-63 B. c. the conquering armies of 
Pompey were largely converted by its high precepts, they brought it 
with them into the Roman Empire. Mithraism spread with great ra- 
pidity throughout the Empire, and was adopted, patronized and pro- 
tected by a number of the Emperors up to the time of Constantine ; it 
was only overthrown by the proscriptive laws and sword of Constan- 
tine and Theodosius, who "signed its death warrant" at the behest of 


the triumphant and intolerant Christians, who absorbed virtually the 
entire system of Mithraism. But let CE. proceed with the story. The 
reader is asked to check mentally each of the uninspired details of 
Pagan invention with the "divinely revealed" identities of the Chris- 
tian Faith. 


"Mithraism is a pagan religion consisting mainly of tlie cult of the 
ancient Indo-Iranian Sun-God Mithra. It entered Europe from Asia 
Minor after Alexander's conquest, spread rapidly over the whole Roman 
Empire at the beginning of our era, reached its zenith during the third 
century, and vanished under the repressive regulations of Theodosius at 
the end of the fourth. [Of late it has been] brought into prominence mainly 
because of its supposed [ ? ] similarity to Christianity. 

"The origin of the cult of Mithra dates from the time that Hindus and 
Persians still formed one people, for the god Mithra occurs in the religion 
and sacred books of both races, L e. in the Vedas and in the Avesta. . . . 
After the conquest of Babylon (538 B. c.) this Persian cult came into con- 
tact with Chaldean astrology and with the national worship of Marduk. 
For a time the two priesthoods of Mithra and Marduk coexisted in the 
capital and Mithraism borrowed much from this intercourse. . . . This 
religion, in which the Iranian element remained predominant, came, after 
Alexander's conquest, in touch with the Western world. When finally the 
Romans took possession of the Kingdom of Pergamum (in 133 B. c.), oc- 
cupied Asia Minor, and stationed two legions of soldiers on the Euphrates, 
the success of Mithraism was secured. It spread rapidly from the Bos- 
phorus to the Atlantic, from Illyria to Britain. Its foremost apostles were 
the legionaries ; hence it spread first to the frontier stations of the Roman 

"Mithraism was emphatically a soldier religion; Mithra, its hero, was 
especially a divinity of fidelity, manliness, and bravery; the stress it laid 
on good-fellowship and brotherliness, its exclusion of women, and the 
secret bond among its members have suggested the idea that Mithraism 
was Masonry among the Roman soldiery." Several of the Roman Em- 
perors, down to LiciniuSj colleague of Constantine, built temples to Mithra, 
and issued coins with his symbols. "But with the triumph of Christianity 
[after Constantine] Mithraism came to a sudden end. The laws of 
Theodosius [proscribing it under penalty of death, to please the Chris- 
tians] signed its death warrant. Though he was still worshipped a thou- 
sand years later by the Manichees. (p. 402). . . . 

"Ahura Mazda and Ahriman. This incarnate evil (Ahriman) rose 
with the army of darkness to attack and depose Oromasdes (Ahura Mazda). 



They were however thrown back into hell, whence they escape, wander 
over the face of the earth and afflict man. ... As evil spirits ever lie in 
wait for hapless man, he needs a friend and saviour, who is Mithra. . . . 
Mithra is the Mediator between God and Man. The Mithraists . . . bat- 
tled on Mithra's side against all impurity, against all evil within and 
without. They believed in the immortality of the soul ; sinners after death 
were dragged down to hell; the just passed through the seven spheres of 
the planets, leaving at each planet a part of their lower humanity until, 
as pure spirits, they stood before God. At the end of the world Mithra will 
descend to earth, . . . and will make all drink the beverage of immor- 
tality. He will thus have proved himself Nabarses, 'the never con- 
quered.' . . . 

"The fathers conducted the worship. The chief of the fathers, a sort 
of pope, who always lived at Rome, was called Tater Patratus' . * . The 
members below the grade of pater called one another 'brother/ and social 
distinctions were forgotten in Mithraic unity. ... A sacred meal was 
celebrated of bread and haoma juice for which in the West wine was sub- 
stituted. This meal was supposed to give the participants supernatural 
virtue. . . . 

"Three times a day prayer was offered the sun towards east, south, 
or west according to the hour. SUNDAY was kept holy in honour of 
Mithra, and the sixteenth of each month was sacred to him as Mediator. 
The 5 December was observed as his birthday, the Natalis Invictis, the re- 
birth of the winter-sun, unconquered by the rigours of the season.'* (pp. 
403-404.) It may be noted that Sunday was made a Pagan holiday by edict 
of Constantine. In the fifth Tablet of the Babylonian (Chaldean) Epic of 
Creation, by the great God Marduk, we read, lines 17 and 18: "On the 
seventh day he appointed a holy day, And to cease from all work he com- 
manded/' (Records of the Past, vol. ix ; quoted, Clarke, Ten Great Reli- 
gions, ii, p. 383.) 

To resume with CE.: "No proof of immorality or obscene practices has 
ever been established against Mithraism; and as far as can be ascertained, 
or rather conjectured, it had an elevating and invigorating effect on its 
followers. [So different from Christianity!] . . . 

"Relation to Christianity. A similarity between Mithra and Christ 
struck even early observers, such as Justin, Tertullian, and other Fathers, 
and in recent times has been urged to prove that Christianity is but an 
adaptation of Mithraism, or at least the outcome of the same religious ideas 
and aspirations. Some apparent [they are very apparent] similarities exist; 
but in a number of details [it is substance that is identical] it is quite 
as probable that Mithraism was the borrower from Christianity. [But 
these essential identities are found in the Vedas and Avesta, of maybe 
two thousand years before -Christianity; Zoroaster, who gave final form to 
the creed, lived some 600 years before the Christ!] It is not unnatural to 


suppose that a religion which swept the whole world, should have been 
copied at least in some details by another religion which was quite popu- 
lar during the third century [and for nine, or twenty centuries before!] 
Similarity in words and names means nothing; it is the sense that matters. 
[To be sure; we proceed to see more of the sense the essence to be 
identical] . . . 

"Mithra is called a mediator; and so is Christ . . . And so in similar 
instances. Mithraism had a Eucharist, but the idea of the sacred banquet 
is as old as the human race and existed at all ages and amongst all peo- 
ples. [Not much ''divine revelation" in this the greatest of Christian 
mysteries!]. Mithra saved the world by sacrificing a bull [just as the 
Jews saved themselves] ; Christ by sacrificing Himself. . . . Mithraism 
was all comprehensive and tolerant of every other cult; Christianity was 
essentially exclusive, condemning every other religion in the world, alone 
and unique in its majesty." (CE. x, 402-404.) 

But this "unique majesty" was hidden away in the catacombs of 
Rome for quite three centuries ; coming out, it condemned and perse- 
cuted to death every other religion because rivals for the rich per- 
quisites of priestcraft and dominion. 

The above striking analogies, or identities, between the ages-old 
Mithraism and the "newer Paganism called Christianity," compelling 
as they are of the certainty of "borrowing" by Christianity, are 
dwarfed by the evidences now to be presented in the confessions of CE. 9 
that the Jews first, then the Christians, took over bodily from the 
Babylonians and the Persians, not only the entire celestial and infer- 
nal systems of those two closely related religions, but virtually that 
high ethic, or moral code "the highest religious result to which hu- 
man reason- unaided by revelation, can attain," which Christians 
so loudly pretend is, by "divine revelation" of their God theirs alone, 
while all other peoples "sat in darkness and in the shadow of death" 
without its saving light. Christianity looks with disdain on the Mith- 
raic religion because it is a "dualism" ; that is, the Evil Spirit was 
separately created apart from the Good God ; while it is a fundamen- 
tal tenet of the Christian Faith, that its God himself created the 
Christian Devil and all evil and is therefore morally responsible for 
all his deviltry. 

Speaking particularly of Angelology, though the admission will 
be found to apply to all the other features to be noticed, CE. shows 



that all this is an importation into Judaism from the Persians and 
Babylonians: "That the Persian domination and the Babylonian 
Captivity exercised a large influence upon the Hebrew conception 
[not, therefore, a revelation] of the angels is acknowledged in the 
Talmud of Jerusalem (Rosh Haschanna, 56), where it is said that 
[even] the names of the angels were introduced from Babylon. . . . 
Stress has been laid upon the similarity of the 'seven who stand before 
God* and the seven Amesha-Spentas of the Zend-Avesta. ... It is 
easy for the student to trace the influence of surrounding nations and 
of other religions in the Biblical account of angels" (CE. i, 481 ) ; 
which seriously cripples the notion of divine revelation regarding 
these celestial messengers of God. Again it indicates the "connection 
between the angels of the Bible, and the 'great archangels* or 'Amesha- 
Spentas* of the Zend-Avesta" ; also "we find an interesting parallel to 
the 'angel of the Lord' in Nebo, 'the minister of Merodach.* . . , The 
Babylonian suJcalli corresponded to the spirit-messengers of the Bible ; 
they declared their Lord's will and executed his behests." . . . "The 
belief in guardian angels . . . was also the belief of the Babylonians 
and Assyrians"; the origin of the Bible "cherubim" was the same, 
as also of guardian angels, "as their monuments testify, for a figure 
now in the British Museum might well serve for a modern representa- 
tion." Por detailed accounts, see the articles "Angels" and "Guardian 
Angels," in CE. And so of Demons and Demonology, and Demoniac 
possession : "In many ways one of the most remarkable demonologics 
is that presented in the Avesta" ; Ahriman being their chief devil, or 
Daeva; "the original meaning of the word is 'shining one/ and it 
comes from a primitive Aryan root div, which is likewise the source of 
the Greek Zeus and the Latin Deus. But while these words, like the 
Sanskrit deva, retain the good meaning, daeva has come to mean *aa 
evil spirit.* There is at least a coincidence, if no deeper significance, 
in the fact that, while the word in its original sense was synonymous 
with 'Lucifer,* it has now come to mean much the same as detAl" (CE* 
iv, 714-15, pasism; 764). Lucifer, in the Bible, having also been orig- 
inally "a shining one'* in Heaven, was cast out into Hell and is now the 

With these preliminaries of identity between the invention of angels 
and devils of Mithraic Paganism and Hebrew-Christian "revelation,** 


we will now let CE. confess further identities, both of "revelation" and 
of the "divinely revealed moral code," summarized from the Mith- 
raic Zend-Avesta. We seem to be reading the Catechism or a tract on 
"Christian Evidences." 

"The name of the Supreme God of the Avestic system is Ahura Mazda, 
which probably signifies the All-Wise Lord. . . . Ahura Mazda is a 
pure Spirit; his chief attributes are eternity, wisdom, truth, goodness, 
majesty, power. He is the creator of all good creatures noi, however, 
of Evil, of evil beings [as is the Christian God]. He is the supreme 
Lawgiver, the Rewarder of moral good, and the Punisher of moral evil. 
He dwells in Eternal Light, ... a kind of manifestation of His presence, 
like the Old Testament SheJcinah* . . . We find frequent enumerations 
of the attributes of Ahura Mazda; thus these are said to be 'omniscience, 
all-sovereignty, all goodness/ Again He is styled 'Supreme Sovereign, 
Wise Creator, Supporter, Protector, Giver of good things, Virtuous in 
acts, Merciful, Pure Lawgiver, Lord of the Good Creations/ . . . 

"Opposed to Ahura Mazda, or Ormuzd, is His rival, Anro Mainyus, 
(later Ahriman), the Evil Spirit. He is conceived as existing quite inde- 
pendently of Ahura Mazda, apparently from eternity, but destined to de- 
struction at the end of time. Evil by nature and in every detail the exact 
opposite of Ahura Mazda, he is the creator of all evil, both moral and 
physical. [But of the Christian God: "I Jehovah create evil"; Isa. 

"The specific name of Ahura Mazda in opposition to the Evil Spirit 
is Spento Mainyus, THE HOLY SPIRIT: and Ahura Mazda and Spento 
Mainyus are synonymous throughout the Avesta. [p. 154]. . . . 

"Around Ahura Mazda is a whole hierarchy of spirits, corresponding 
very closely to our 'angels/ ... Of the good spirits who surround Ahura, 
the most important are the Amesha Spentas ('Holy Immortals' or 'Holy 
Saints'), generally reckoned as six in number (but seven when Ahura 
Mazda is included), . . . Most of all Vohu Manah rises to a position of 
unique importance. . . . Vohu Manah is conceived as the 'SON OF THE 
CREATOR/ and identified with the Alexandrian LOGOS [of John i, 1], 
Asha, also, is the Divine Law, Right, Sanctity (cf. Psalm 118), and oc- 
cupies a most conspicuous place throughout the Avesta. . . . With him 
are associated in a trio [TRINITY], Rashnu (Right, Justice), and 
MITHRA. [These Aryan names sound unfamiliar; but as CE. has as- 
sured, "names mean nothing; it is the sense that matters"; and here we 
have the whole Jewish-Christian hierarchies of Heaven and Hell a thou- 
sand years before Jewish- Christian "revelation" identities !] . . . 

"Face to face with the hierarchy of celestial spirits is a diabolical one, 
that of the daevas (Pers. div or dev) and drug's of the Evil Spirit. They 



fill exactly the places of the devils in Christian and Jewish theology. . . . 
Perhaps the most frequently mentioned of all is Aeshma, the Demon of 
Wrath or Violence, whose name has come down to us in the Asmodeus 
(Aeshmo daeva) of the Book of Tobias [Tobit]. . . . 

"In the midst of the secular warfare that has gone on from the begin- 
ning between the two hosts of Good and Evil stands Man. Man is the crea- 
ture of the Good Spirit, but endowed with a free will and power of choice, 
able to place himself on the side of Ahura Mazda or on that of Anro Main- 
yus. The former has given him, through His Prophet Zarathushtra (Zoroas- 
ter) His Divine Revelation and law. According as man obeys or disobeys 
this Divine Law his future lot will be decided; by it he will be judged at his 
death. The whole ethical system is built upon this great principle, as in 
the Christian theology ["revelation"?]. Moral good, righteousness, sanc- 
tity (asha) is according to the Divine will and decrees; Man by his free 
will conforms to, or transgresses, these. The Evil Spirit and his innumer- 
able hosts tempt Man to deny or transgress the Divine Law, as he tempted 
Zoroaster himself, promising him as a reward the sovereignty of the whole 
world. [Exactly Jesus and the Devil.] 'No/ replied the Prophet, *I will 
not renounce it, even if body and soul and life should be severed !* ( Vendi- 
dad, xix, 25, 26). ["Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God, for it is 
written," may sound more Godlike but maybe little more heroic.] . . . 

"The moral teaching is closely akin to our own. Stress is constantly laid 
on the necessity of goodness in thought, word, and deed. ["Through the 
Three Steps, the good thought, the good word, and the good deed, I enter 
Paradise."] Note the emphatic recognition of sin in thought. Virtues and 
vices are enumerated and estimated much as in Christian ethics. Special 
value is attributed to the virtues of religion, truthfulness, purity, and gen- 
erosity to the poor (p. 155). Heresy, untruthfulness, perjury, sexual sins, 
violence, tyranny, are especially reprobated. . . . 

"The soul of the just passes over the bridge into a happy eternity, into 
heaven, the abode of Ahura and His blessed angels. The wicked soul falls 
from the fatal bridge and is precipitated into hell. Of this abode of misery 
a lively description occurs in the later Pahlavi 'Vision of Arda Viraf/ 
whose visit to the Inferno, with realistic description of the torment*, 
vividly recalls that of Dante. . . . 

"At the end of time, the approach of which is described in the Pahlavi 
literature in terms strikingly like those of our Apocalypse, will come 
Saoshyant (SAVIOUR) under whom will occur the Resurrection of the 
Dead, the General Judgment, the renewal of the whole world ["a new 
heaven and a new earth"] by a general conflagration and terrible flood of 
burning matter ["the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the ele- 
ments shall melt with fervent beat"]. This terrible flood will purify all 
creatures ; even the wicked will be purified from all stains, and even hell 
will be cleansed and added to the 'new heavens and new earth.* Meanwhile 


a mighty combat takes place between Soashyant [the "Saviour"] and his 
followers and the demon hosts of the Evil Spirit, who are utterly routed 
and destroyed forever. . . . 

"The highest religious result to which human reason unaided by Revela- 
tion can attain" ! (CE. ii, 154K156, passim.) 

Thus "human reason unaided by revelation" had attained, ages be- 
fore Moses, the Prophets, and Jesus Christ, a system of religious beliefs 
and a moral code in substantial identity with the "divine revelations" 
of God to Moses, the Prophets, and his Son Jesus Christ. At the time 
of the Advent of the Latter, and for three hundred years later, 
throughout the Roman Empire, that is, throughout the well-known 
world, this wonderful Pagan invention, with its "Pope" and Seat in 
Imperial Rome, and patronized by the Emperors, lived along side with 
and mightily rivalled the struggling Faith hid in the catacombs, 
until its rival Christians got hold of the sword under Constantrne, and 
"triumphed," its "death warrant was signed" in blood by the laws of 
the persecuting Christians. Did any God wondrously "reveal" to the 
Christians these holy Pagan dreams and myths? What a waste of 
while for a God to mysteriously "reveal" these "heathen deceits" thou- 
sands of years old, and that everybody in the world already knew! 


The account given by CE. of the Lord Buddha and of Buddhism, 
by the simple substitution of the names Christ [the Saviour of Bud- 
dhism is Crishna, the "incarnation" of the supreme god Vishnu] 
and Christianity, might well be mistaken for a homily on our own holy 
faith and its Founder who would no more recognize present-day 
Christianity than would Buddha the crass superstition which is today 
tagged with his holy name. Says CE.: 

"It is noteworthy that Buddha was a contemporary of two other famous 
religious philosophers, Pythagoras and Confucius. In the sacred books of 
later times Buddha is depicted as a character without a flaw, adorned with 
every grace of mind and heart. There may be some hesitation in taking the 
highly colored portrait of Buddhist tradition as an exact representation of 
the original, but Buddha may be credited with the qualities of a great and 
good man. ... In all pagan antiquity no character has been depicted as 
so noble and attractive. ... 



"Buddha's order was composed only of those who renounced the world 
to live a life of contemplation as monks and nuns. ... [In the time of 
King Asoka, 3rd century B. c.] Buddhism was in a most flourishing condi- 
tion; it had become a formidable rival of the older religion [ Brahmanism] , 
while a tolerant and kindly spirit [unknown to Christianity] was dis- 
played towards other forms of religion. . . . [By the seventh century 
A> Di h ere it parallels Christianity again] an excessive devotion to statues 
and relics, the employment of magic arts to keep off evil spirits, and the 
observance of many gross superstitions, complete the picture of Buddhism, 
a sorry representation of what Buddha made known to men. . . . The vast 
majority of the adherents of Buddhism cling to forms of creed and wor- 
ship that Buddha, if alive, would reprobate [as would Christ in the case 
of Christianity]. Northern Buddhism became the very opposite of what 
Buddha taught to men, and in spreading to foreign lands accommodated 
itsielf to the degrading superstitions of the people it sought to win [pre- 
cisely as we shall see that Christianity did to inveigle the Pagans] , . . . 

"Between Buddhism and Christianity there are a number of resem- 
blances, at first sight striking. The Buddhist order of monks and nuns 
offers points of similarity with Christian monastic systems, particularly the 
mendicant orders. There are moral aphorisms ascribed to Buddha that are 
not unlike some of the sayings of Christ. Most of all, in the legendary life 
of Buddha . . . there are many parallelisms, some more, some less strik- 
ing, to the Gospel stories of Christ. A few third rate scholars [ contend that 
these are borrowings from Buddhism. Why not, as everything else is "bor- 
rowed" or filched?]. ... 

"One of its most attractive features . . . was its practice of benevolence 
towards the sick and needy. Between Buddhists and Brahmins there was a 
commendable rivalry in maintaining dispensaries of food and medicine" 
long claimed as a holy monopoly of "Christian charity." (C. iii, 28- 
34, pa&sim.) 

As elsewhere recounted, the Holy Ghost made a curious mistake in 
inspiring the certification of sundry Saints, and the Lord Buddha 
was himself canonized by Holy Church, as St. Josaphat, and the 
"Life" of this holy Saint was highly edifying to the Faithful as well 
as effective in spreading the Christian truth: "During the Middle 
Ages the 'Life of Barlaam and Josaphat' had been translated into 
some twenty languages, English included, so that in reality the story 
of Buddha became the vehicle of Christian truth in many nations" ! 

It is now evident, and will further so appear, that there is no single 
novel feature nor "revealed truth" In all the Christian religion : our 


Holy Faith is all a hodgepodge or pot pourri of the credulities of 
every superstition from Afric Voodooism to the latest one anywhere 
in holy vogue among the credulous. Even our "idea" of God with its 
superlatives of "revealed" high attributes is very primitive: "The 
idea of a Being higher than man, invisible, inaccessible, master of life 
and death, orderer of all things, seems to exist everywhere, among the 
Negritos, the Hottentots, the Bantu, the Nigritians, the Hamites ; for 
everywhere this Being has a name. He is the 'Great,' the 'Ancient 
One, 5 the 'Heavenly One,' the 'Bright One,' the 'Master,' some- 
times the 'Author' or 'Creator'. . . , Nowhere is He represented 
under any image, for He is incapable of representation." (CE. i, 183, 

Cardinal Newman, commenting on Dean Milman's "History of 
the Jews," groups a number of these Paganisms in Christianity, and 
says that Milman arrays facts "admitted on all hands," to wit : "that 
the doctrine of the Logos is Platonic ; that of the Incarnation Indian ; 
that of a divine Kingdom Judaic ; that of angels and demons (and a 
Mediator) Persian; that the connection of sin with the body is 
Gnostic; the idea of a new birth Chinese and Eleusinian; that of 
sacramental virtue Pythagorian; that of Trinity common to East 
and West; and that of the rites of baptism and sacrifice equally 
ubiquitous"! (Newman, Essays, Critical and Historical, 7th ed., 
p. 231 ; as summarized by the Rt. Hon. J. M. Robertson in A His- 
tory of Freethought in the XlXth Century, p. 145-6. London, 

Such is our holy Christian "Faith which was once delivered unto the 
saints," which "superstition, drunk in with their mother's milk," yet 
persists with the ignorant and those who do not or will not know the 

That Christianity is indeed but a "new form of Paganism," and 
especially after it became the official or State religion, consciously 
and purposely, in furtherance of the Imperial policy of "One State, 
one Religion," perfected the amalgamation of the salient features 
of all the fluxing religions of the Empire so as to bring all Pagans 
within the one State-Church, is accredited by secular and Church 
history ; and is quite ingenuously revealed by CJ5J., treating of the in- 
fluence of Constantine on Christianity: 



"Long before this, belief in the old polytheism had been shaken. The 
world was fully ripe for monotheism or its modified f orm, henotheism ; but 
this monotheism offered itself in varied guises, under the forms of Oriental 
religions : in the worship of the Sun, in the veneration of Mithras, in Juda- 
ism, and in Christianity. Whoever wished to make a violent break with the 
past and his surroundings sought out some Oriental form of worship which 
did not demand from him too great a sacrifice. Some . . . believed that 
they could appropriate [the truth contained in Judaism and Christianity] 
without being obliged on that account to renounce the beauty of other wor- 
ships. Such a man was the Emperor Alexander Severus (222235) ; another 
so minded was Aurelian (270275), whose opinions were confirmed by 
Christians like Paul of Samosata. Not only Gnostics and other heretics, but 
Christians who considered themselves faithful, held in a measure to the 
worship of the Sun. Leo the Great in his day (440 461) says that it was the 
custom of many Christians to stand on the steps of the Church of St. Peter 
and pay homage to the Sun by obeisance and prayers. 

"When such conditions prevailed it is easy to understand that many of 
the emperors yielded to the delusion that they could unite all their subjects 
in the adoration of the one Sun-god who combined in himself the Father- 
God of the Christians and the much-worshipped Mithras ; thus the empire 
could be founded anew on the unity of religion. It looks almost as though 
the last persecution of the Christians were directed more against all ir- 
reconcilables and extremists than against the great body of Christians. . . * 

"It was especially in the West that the veneration of Mithras predomi- 
nated [after centuries of Christianity!]. Would it not be po.ssible to 
gather all the different nationalities around his altars ? Could not Sol Deus 
Invictus, to whom even Constantine dedicated his coins for a long time, or 
Sol Mithras Deus Invictus, venerated by Diocletian and Galerius, become 
the supreme god of the empire? Constantine . . . had not absolutely re- 
jected the thought even after a miraculous event [ ! ] had strongly in- 
fluenced him in favour of the God of the Christians, [who, however, wor- 
shipped the Sun !] . . . 

"For a time it seemed as if merely tolerance and equality were to prevail, 
Constantine showed equal favour to both religions. As pontifex uiaxhnus he 
watched over the heathen worship and protected its rights* ... In the 
dedication of Constantinople in 330 a ceremonial half pagan, half Christian 
was used. The chariot of the Sun-god was set in the market-place, and over 
its head was placed the Cross of Christ [not the original, which his 
mother had not yet been reputed by the priests to have discovered L e* 
"invented," of which more anon], while the Kyrie Eleison was sung. 
Shortly before his death Constantine confirmed the privilege* of the 
priests of the ancient gods. . . . 

"In the same way religious freedom and tolerance could not continue 
as a form of equality; the age was not ready for such a conception: [with 


more of the like, p. 299 ; which is untrue, as Constantino himself had pro- 
claimed religious freedom in the Edict of Milan of 313, and we have just 
seen it admitted in Buddhism, and it prevailed at all times in the Roman 
Empire, until the "Christian Emperors" gave the Church the sword, as in 
Chapter VII exemplified]. . . . Without realising the full import of his 
actions, Constantine granted the Church one privilege after another. As 
early as 313 the Church obtained immunity for its ecclesiastics, including 
freedom from taxation. . . . Constantine moreover placed Sunday under 
the protection of the State [ as a Pagan holiday, as cited, post] . It is true 
that the believers in Mithras also observed Sunday as well as Christmas. 
Consequently Constantine speaks not of the day of the Lord, but of the 
everlasting day of the Sun. . . . 

"Of Constantine's sons the eldest, Constantine II, showed decided 
leanings to heathenism, and his coins bear many pagan emblems; the 
second and favourite son, Constantius, was a more pronounced Christian, 
but it was Arian [anti-Divinity of Christ] Christianity to which he ad- 
hered. Constantius was an unwavering opponent of paganism; he closed all 
the temples and forbade sacrifices under pain of death. His maxim was: 
e Cesset superstitio; sacrificiorum aboleatur insania' ('Let superstition 
cease; let the folly of sacrifices be abolished'). Their successors had re- 
course to persecution against heretics and pagans. Their laws (Cod. Theod. 
XVI, v; [post, Chapter J 7 /!]) had an unfavourable influence on the Middle 
Ages and were the basis of the much-abused [ I ] Inquisition." (CE. iv, 
297-301, passim.) 

Thus was the ultimate merger and total identity of Paganism with 
"the new Paganism called Christianity" finally established by law and 
by Imperial policy of "One State and One Religion," to which conform- 
ity was enforced by laws of confiscation and death ; all the other re- 
ligions of the Empire were fused by fire and sword into a bastard Chris- 
tianity ; and the mental and moral benightedness known as the Dark 
Ages of Faith fell as a pall over Christendom for a thousand years 
until the renaissance of Pagan culture and freedom of thought darkly 
dawned over the world, and has fearfully struggled into a bright- 
ening day, whose motto of Hope is again "Cesset Superstitio"! when 
Constantine's funest "League with Death and Covenant with Hell" 
of State and Church will soon in reality be a forgotten Scrap of Paper I 


The pious Christian Fathers were themselves sorely puzzled and 
scandalized by these same things ; their books are replete with naive 



attempts to explain the mystery of it, which they attributed to the 
blasphemous wiles of the Devil, that "the Devil had blasphemously 
imitated the Christian rites and doctrines"; "always seeing in 
pagan analogies the trickery of devils." (CE. xi, 393.) "It having 
reached the Devil's ears," says the devout Father Justin Martyr, 
"that the prophets had foretold the coming of Christ, the Son of 
God, he set the heathen Poets to bring forward a great many who 
should be called the sons of Jove. The Devil laying his scheme in this, 
to get men to imagine that the true history of Christ was of the same 
character as the prodigious fables related of the sons of Jove." (I 
Apology, ch. 54s; ANF. i, 181-182.) 

Not only the Fathers, but the Bible, Hebrew and Christian, recog- 
nized and affirmed the actuality and ever-living reality of the Pagan 
gods, though the late post-exilic writer of the 95th Psalm maliciously 
dubs them devils: "All the gods [Heb. eloTiim} of the nations are 
devils" (Heb. elilim not much difference between them' in Hebrew; 
Ps, xcvi, 5) ; and this view the Christian forger of the Epistle under 
the n&me of Paul to the Corinthians confirms : "The things which the 
Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils" (I Cor. x, 20). Though these 
malevolent flings at the venerable divinities of Pagandom are in direct 
violation of the Siniatic Law of God "Thou shalt not revile the 
gods" (Ex. xxii, 28) ; the Hebrew Yahveh being, according to 
divine revelation, simply one of many gods- "a God above all god" 
even "God of gods and Lord of lords," who "judgeth among the 
[other] gods." 

Fathers Justin, Tertullian, and many another, says the CE., could 
only "see in all pagan law and ritual an immense pillage of Jewish 
traditions, and, in all the gods, Moses" ; the error and folly of which 
notion, argues our authority, is demonstrated by reference to Mid- 
dleton' s Letter from Rome, in which he, with Calvin., "saw an exact 
conformity between popery and paganism," (CE. xii, 393,) Whether 
Middleton and Calvin were so far in error and folly in this opinion, 
our researches will reveal. Collins, too, in his Discourse, supports 
with good authorities the opinions of Middleton and Calvin. He cites 
Father Origen as "so far from disowning an agreement between 
[Pagan] Platonism and Christianity, that a great part of his book 
Contra Celswm consists In showing the conformity between them." 


Likewise, he says, Amelius, a heathen Platonist, who flourished in the 
third century, upon reading the first verses of St. John the Evangel- 
ist, exclaimed: "Per Jovem, barbarus iste cum nostro Platone sentit 
By Jove, this barbarian agrees with our Plato" ; and he quotes the 
celebrated saying of Cardinal Palavicino "Senza Aristotele noi 
mancavamo di molti Artlcoli di Fede Without Aristotle we should 
be without many Articles of Faith." (Collins, Discourse of Free 
Thinking, p. 127.) 

Not only did the Fathers and the Church admit with implicit faith 
the living reality of the gods of heathendom, their powers, oracles, 
miracles and other "analogies" to the Christian faith, they even made 
of such analogies their strongest apologies, or arguments, in defense 
of the truth of the Christian tenets. In his Apologia addressed to the 
Emperor Hadrian, Father Justin reasons from analogy thus : 

"By declaring the Logos, the first-begotten of God, our Master, Jesus 
Christ, to be born of a Virgin, without any human mixture, we [ Christians] 
say no more in this than what you [Pagans] say of those whom you style 
the Sons of Jove. For you need not be told what a parcel of sons the writers 
most in vogue among you assign to Jove. . . . 

"As to the Son of God, called Jesus, should we allow him to be nothing 
more than man, yet the title of 'the Son of God* is very justifiable, upon 
the account of his wisdom, considering that you [Pagans] have your 
Mercury in worship under the title of The Word, a messenger of God. . . . 

"As to his [Jesus] being born of a Virgin, you have your Perseus to 
balance that." (Justin, Apologia* I, ch. xxii; ANF . i, 170.) 

The good Fathers carried their argument by analogy into proof 
of all sorts of holy Christian mysteries ; the Pagan Oracles and mir- 
acles were undeniably valid and true, why not therefore their new 
Christian counterparts? '^Without a single exception," says the his- 
torian of European Morals, "the Fathers maintained the reality of 
the Pagan miracles as fully as their own. The oracles had been ridi- 
culed and rejected by numbers of the philosophers, but the Christians 
unanimously admitted their reality. They appealed to a long series 
of Oracles as predictions of their faith ; not until 1696 was there a 
denial of their supernatural character, when a Dutch Anabaptist 
minister, Van Dale, in a remarkable book, De Origine Progressu 
Idolatriae, asserted in opposition to the unanimous voice of ecclesias- 



tical authority, that they were simple impostures. 55 (Lecky, History 
of European Morals, i, 374-375, et seq.; see pp. 378-381, et seq.) 
The Christian Fathers and their followers made themselves so ridic- 
ulous by their fatuous faith in the Sibyls that they were derisively 
called "Sibyllists 55 by the Pagans. 


The most curious in all respects, and for our present purposes the 
most instructive of the ancient Pagan religious frauds, are the 
Sibylline Oracles, which, extensively reinforced by Jewish and Chris- 
tian forgeries, were perhaps the most potent and popular "proofs' 5 
of the early Church for the divinity of Jesus Christ and the truth of 
the Christian religion ; thus they deserve special notice here. All will 
remember, from their school histories of ancient Rome, the well-known 
legend of one of the Sibyls who came to King Tarquin the Second with 
nine volumes of Oracles, which she offered to sell to him for a very 
high price; being refused, she went away and burned three of 
the books, and returning offered the remaining six at the same 
price ; again the King refused to buy, and she departed, burned three 
more of the books, and returned with the last three for which she de- 
manded the original price. Astonished at this conduct and greatly im- 
pressed, the King consulted his augurs and was advised to secure 
the remaining treasures of prophecy before it was too late; he did 
so, and immediately the Seeress disappeared and was never seen 
again. The precious tomes were deposited with great care and jeal- 
ously guarded in the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus; a college of 
priests was instituted to have charge of them ; and the divine Oracles 
were consulted with great solemnity only in times of the greatest 
crises of the State. The books were finally destroyed when the Cap- 
itol was burned during the wars of Sylla, but many others continued 
in existence. 

The oracles were composed in Alexandrine verse, and claimed to be 
the work of inspired Pagan prophetesses called Sibyls; they enjoyed 
the greatest vogue and were believed with the most implicit faith by 
Pagans and Christians alike. There were a number of these Sibyls, 
and the number of the volumes of oracles is differently estimated as 

a dozen or more ; those with which we are chiefly concerned are the 
Roman Cumaean and Greek Erythraean Sibyls and the Oracles going 
under their names. The inveterate bent of the priestly mind for for- 
gery in furtherance of its holy mission of imposture, led to the prompt 
adoption and corruption of these Pagan frauds, for the propagation 
first of the Jewish, then of the Christian Faith. "Because of the vogue 
enjoyed by these heathen oracles," says the Catholic Encyclopedia, 
"and because of the influence they had m shaping the religious views 
of the period, the Hellenistic Jews in Alexandria, during the second 
century B. c. composed [i. e. forged] verses in the same form, and 
circulated them among the Pagans as a means of diffusing Judaistic 
doctrines and teaching. This custom was continued down into Chris- 
tian times, and was borrowed by some Christians, so that in the sec- 
ond or third century, a new class of Oracles emanating from 
Christian sources came into being. -Hence the Sibylline Oracles can 
be classed as Pagan, Jewish, or Christian. In many cases, however, 
the Christians merely revised or interpolated the Jewish documents, 
and thus we have two classes of Christian Oracles, those adopted 
from Jewish sources and those entirely written by Christians. . . . 
It seems clear, however, that the Christian Oracles and those revised 
from Jewish sources all emanated from the same circle [or band of 
Christian forgers] and were intended to aid in the diffusion of 

"The Sibyls are quoted frequently by the early Fathers and Chris- 
tian writers, Justin, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Clement of Alexan- 
dria, etc. . . . They were known and used during the Middle Ages in 
both the East and the West. . . . They all purport to be the work of 
the Sibyls." (CE. v. xiii, p. 770.) 

Most notable of these forged Christian addenda to the Pagan- 
Jewish forged Oracles, is found in Book VIII, a lengthy composite 
of Jewish and Christian fraud, consisting of some 500 hexameter 
verses. The first 216 verses, says the CE., "are most likely the work 
of a second century Jew, while the latter part (verses 217-500), be- 
ginning with an acrostic on the symbolical Christian word Ichthus 
is undoubtedly Christian, and dates most probably from the third 
century." (CE. xiii, 770.) Ichthus is the Greek word for fish, and the 
fish was the fitting and universal symbol of the early Christians as 



typical of the "catch" of the Apostolic fishers of men. This cabalistic 
word Ichthus, worked into the professedly Pagan Oracle in the form 
of an acrostic, is composed of the initial letters of the popular name 
and title of the Son of the Christian God, in the Greek: "lesous 
Christos Theou Uios Soter Jesus Christ, .Son of God, Saviour." 
This fish anagram was an ancient Pagan symbol of fecundity, of great 
vogue and veneration throughout Pagandom, and was adopted by 
Christendom for the double reason that the initials acrostically 
formed the name and title of its new deity, and that in the ancient 
science fish were supposed to be generated in the water without carnal 
copulation, and were thus peculiarly symbolic of the Virgin-born 
Christ. Says Tertullian : "We, little fishes, after the example of our 
Ichthus, are born in water." (On Baptism, ch. i ; ANF. iii, 669.) 

The Church historian, Bishop Eusebius, preserves the Acrostic, 
taken from the Erythraean Sibyl, but says: "Many people, though 
they allowed the Erythraean Sibyl to have been a prophetess, yet re- 
ject this Acrostic, suspecting it to have been forged by the Chris- 
tians"; which suspicion the good Bishop refutes by an appeal to 
Cicero, who, he assures, had read and translated it into Latin. 
(Eusebius, Oration on Const., chs. 18-19; I, 274-5.) Father St. Au- 
gustine quotes the verses and says : "The Erythraean Sibyl has indeed 
written some things clearly and manifestly relating to Christ. . . . 
There are some, who suspected all these prophecies which relate to 
Christ, and passed under the name of the Sibyl, to have been forged 
by the Christians." (Aug., De Civ. Dei, xviii, 23 ; NfyPNF. ii, 372- 
3.) Father Clement of Alexandria attributes to the Sibyls the same 
inspiration as the Old Testament, and cites Peter and Paul as ap- 
pealing to them for a prediction of the life and character of Jesus 
Christ, Peter and Paul speaking thus : "Take the Greek books in your 
hand, and look into the Sibyl. How clearly she speaks of one God, 
and of the things to come ; then take Hystaspes also and read, and 
you will find the Son of God much more clearly and evidently de- 
scribed." (Strom. 1, 6, p, 761, Ed. Oxon. ; also Lact., De ver. sap., 1, 4, 
15 ; Free Inquiry, p. 34.) 

The importance of the Sibylline Oracles, speaking through count- 
less "interpolations" forged by Christian pens, for not only the 
propagation of the faith among the Pagans, but as actual proofs 


of the truth of the fictitious "facts" of Christianity, cannot be over- 
estimated; this justifies the following extracts from the Divine 
Institutes of Lactantius. The greater part, I dare say, of the seven 
Books of that notable work, addressed to the "mighty Emperor Con- 
stantine," is devoted to arguments and proofs of Jesus Christ and the 
principal events of his recorded life and acts, drawn copiously from 
the heathen gods and the forged Oracles of the Sibyls. These proofs, 
to the minds of Father Lactantius and of all the Fathers, as to the 
Pagans generally, were "more strong than proofs of Holy Writ 5 '; 
for, he says, "perhaps the sacred writings [in the Old Testament] 
speak falsely when they teach [such and so about Jesus] ; . . . the 
Sibyls before taught the same things in their verses" Citing scores 
of Sibylline "prophecies" forged by the Christians for the belief and 
persuasion of the Pagans, who were effectively "refuted by these 
testimonies" and thus "brought to Christ," some of them, says Lac- 
tantius, urge that these prophetic verses "were not by the Sibyls, but 
made up and composed by our own writers," as the fact is above con- 
fessed by CE.; but, not so, argues the great Apologist; "do not 
Cicero and other Pagan authors, dead long before Jesus, testify to 
the Sibyls?" Yes, to the Sibyls and their utterances then extant; 
not to the later Christian forgeries in their names. Moreover, these 
Christian "interpolations" imputed to the Sibyls, exactly as the 
muddled, ambiguous, meaningless "prophecies" of the Old Testament 
writings, meant nothing and were not understood to mean anything, 
until Jesus Christ came along, and these Jewish and Pagan mum- 
meries were seized upon by the avid forging Christians to make up 
and pad out the pretended life and wondrous acts of the Christ. Even 
a cursory examination and the marginal cross-references will demon- 
strate, that virtually every act imputed in the New Testament Gos- 
pels to the Nazarene, was cut to fit of some scrap of mummery or 
pretended "prophecy" of Hebrew Scriptures and Sibylline Oracles. 
Of numberless instances of the latter quoted in the Divine Institutes 9 
a few typical ones only can be here cited, but they are illuminating 
of the Christ-tales. 

In Book I, chapter vi is entitled, "Of Divine Testimonies, and of 
the Sibyls and their Predictions." Appealing for faith to Constan- 
tine, the chapter begins : "Now let -us pass to divine testimonies"; and 



he cites and quotes, in numerous chapters, the Pagan gods Mercury, 
Hermes Trismegistus, Apollo, and other mythic deities and person- 
ages, all testifying to the One Christian God and to his Son Jesus. 
After infinite such appeals for proofs, we come to Book IV, a veritable 
arsenal of manufactured "divine testimonies" ; and we pause to con 
with wonder chapter xv, "Of the Life and Miracles of Jesus, and 
Testimonies concerning Him." Jesus, after his baptism, says Lac- 
tantius, "began to perform the greatest miracles, not by magical 
powers, but by heavenly strength and power. . . . His powers were 
those which Apollo caUed wonderful. . . . And he performed all 
these things not by His hands, or the application of any remedy, but 
by His word and command, as the Sibyl had foretold: 'Doing all 
things by His word, and healing every disease. 5 " 

Many chapters are replete with instances of the miracles of Jesus, 
alleged each of them to have been foretold by one or another of the 
Sibyls, and quoting the Christian-forged prophetic verses in proof. 
The Christ came to fulfill the Law; "and the Sibyl shows that it 
would come to pass that this law would be destroyed by the Son of 
God: 'But when all these things which I told you shall be accom- 
plished, then all the law is fulfilled with respect to Him.' " (c xvii.) 
Of a few others, and the arguments above sketched, I quote the text : 

"What can be more wonderful, either in narration or in action? But 
the Sibyl had before foretold that it would take place, whose verses are 
related to this effect: 

'With five loaves at the same time, and with two fishes, 
He shall satisfy five thousand men in the wilderness ; 
And afterwards taking all the fragments that remain, 
He shall fill twelve baskets to the hope of many/ 

"But perhaps the sacred writings speak falsely when they teach that 
there was such power in Him, that by His command He compelled the 
winds to obey Him, the seas to serve Him, diseases to depart, the dead to 
be submissive. Why should I say that the Sibyls before had taught the same 
things in their verses? one of whom, already mentioned, thus speaks: 

'He shall still the winds by His word, and calm the sea 
As it rages, treading with feet of peace and in faith.* 

"And again another which says : 


'He shall walk on the waves, He shall release men from disease. 1 

He shall raise the dead, and drive away many pains ; 
And from the bread of one wallet there shall be a satisfying [of men]/ 

"Some, refuted by these testimonies, are accustomed to have recourse 
to the assertion that these poems were not by the Sibyls, but made up 
and composed by our own writers. But he will assuredly not think this 
who has read Cicero [De Natura Deorum, ii], and Varro, and other an- 
cient writers, who make mention of the Erythraean and the other Sibyls 
from whose books we bring forth these examples ; and these authors died 
before the birth of Christ according to the flesh. But I do not doubt that 
these poems were in former times regarded as ravings, since no one under- 
stood them. For they announced some marvellous wonders, of which 
neither the manner, nor the time, nor the author was signified. Lastly the 
Erythraean Sibyl says that it would come to pass that she would be called 
mad and deceitful. But assuredly 

They will say that the Sibyl 

Is mad, and deceitful: but when all things shall come to pass, 
Then ye will remember me ; and no one will any longer 
Say that I, the prophetess of the great God, am mad.' 

"Therefore they were neglected for many ages; but they received at- 
tention after the nativity and passion of Christ had revealed secret things. 
Thus it was also with the utterances of the prophets, which were read by 
the people of the Jews for fifteen hundred [ 1] years and more, but yet 
were not understood until after Christ had explained them by His word 
and by His works. For the prophets spoke of Him ; nor could the things 
which they said have been in any way understood, unless they had been 
altogether fulfilled." (Lact., Div. Inst., Bk. IV, chap, xv; ANF. vii, 
115, 116.) 

In view of these "divine testimonies'* of Pagan Oracles forged by 
pious Christians in proof of their Christ, need one wonder that the 
like testimonies in the Gospels themselves may be under suspicion of 
like forgery? We shall have the proofs in their due order. Father 
Justin Martyr treats these Pagan books of Christian evidences, as 
prophetic Scriptures and divine, and speaking of their prohibition by 
the Roman Emperors, says : "By the contrivance of Demons it was 
made a capital crime to read them, in order to deter men from coming 
to a knowledge of what is good" (Apologia, I, ch. 77 ; ANF. i, 178.) 

That heathens and even devils may be specially endued with the 



gift of prophecy by God for his glory, and God may make use of the 
DeviHn-Chief for this purpose, is expressly asserted by Pope Bene- 
dict XIV (Heroic Virtue, III, 144, 150). And "the Angelic Doctor," 
St. Thomas Aquinas, "in order to prove that the heathens were ca- 
pable of prophecy, refers to the instance of the Sibyls, who make clear 
mention of the mysteries of the Trinity, of the Incarnation of the 
Word, of the Life, Passion, and Resurrection of Christ. It is true 
that the Sibylline poems now extant became in course of time inter- 
polated; but as Benedict XIV (1740-1758) remarks, this does not 
hinder much of them, especially what the early Fathers referred 
to, from being genuine and in no wise apocryphal"! (CE. xii, 

Thus the Holy Ghost of God, speaking through its official mouth- 
piece, its Vice-God on earth, infallibly guarded by the Spirit against 
the possibility of error, in the year 1742 of our Era of Christ, sings 
the Doxology of these admitted frauds of paganish and forging 
Christianity, and canonizes them as the God-inspired origin of the 
holiest mysteries of Christian revelation. The inference is inevitable, 
that Pagan Sibyls, Christian Church Fathers, and Vicars of God, 
are strongly characterized by Ignorance and Imposture. 

A noted classical and critical authority, Anthon, contemplating 
the shifts of the new Christianity rising from the d6bcle of Pagan- 
ism, falls into a philosophical reflection, pertinent alike to the old and 
the new systems of priestcraft : 

"When a religion has fallen and been succeeded by another, the more 
zealous advocates of the new belief sometimes find themselves in a curious 
state of embarrassment. So it is with regard to the heathen system and 
the Christian code. Among the numerous oracles given to the world in 
former days, some have chanced to find a remarkable accomplishment; 
and the pious but ill-judging Christian, unable to ascribe them to deities 
in whom man no longer believes, is driven to create for them a different 
origin. 'God/ says Rollin, 'in order to punish the blindness of the heathen, 
sometimes permits evil spirits to give responses conformable to the truth/ 
(Rollin, Histoire Ancienne, I, 387.) The only evil spirit which had an 
agency in the oracular responses of antiquity was that spirit of crafty 
Imposture which finds so congenial a home among an artful and cunning 
priesthood. 9 ' (Anthon, Classical Dictionary, 4th ed,, p. 929; Art. Oroc- 


The historian of European Morals, in his amazing review of the 
infinite variety and number of superstitions, frauds, forgeries, false 
miracles and lying oracles of Pagandom, which, were taken over almost 
en masse by the Christians, and implicitly and with childlike credulity 
accepted and believed, taught and preached by every Christian 
Father of the Church, by the infallible popes, and the millions of 
their ignorant and superstitious ex-Pagan lay dupes, makes this very; 
pertinent and just remark apropos the value of their pious opinions, 
testimonies and "traditions'* of the origins of the Christian faith: 

"To suppose that men who held these opinions were capable, in the 
second and third centuries, of ascertaining with any degree of just confi- 
dence whether miracles had taken place in Judaea in the first century, is 
grossly absurd ; nor would the conviction of their reality have made any 
great impression on their minds at a time when miracles were supposed to 
be so abundantly diffused." (Lecky, Hist. Europ. Morals, i, 375.) 

The confession that the vast mass of Christian miracles were Pagan 
frauds and lies taken en bloc over into Christianity to make a good 
showing as against the Pagans and to dupe the superstitious new 
converts, is made by CE., with the notable further admission that the 
only alteration made was that the Pagan gods were made over into 
Christian saints : "This transference was promoted by the numerous 
cases in which Christian saints became the successors of local deities, 
and Christian worship supplanted the ancient local worship. This 
explains the great number of similarities between gods and saints. 
For the often maintained metamorphosis of gods into saints no proof 
is to be found." This immense confession of Christian f raudulency and 
imposture, in conjuring fictitious Pagan gods which according to 
Christian faith were all actual devils, into canonized Saints of God 
and Holy Church, is several times repeated by CE., of which this in- 
stance is before me : "It has indeed been said that the 'Saints are the 
successors to the Gods,' Instances have been cited ... of statues of 
pagan Gods baptized and transformed- into Christian Saints"! (CE. 
xv, 710 ; cf. Is It God 9 s Word? 5, 7-9.) This truly wonderful psycho- 
religious miracle is thereupon wrought: The idolatrous Pagan who 
just before the "baptism" actually worshipped these "statues of the 
Pagan gods," immediately afterwards simply venerated or adored 



the same gods baptized and transformed into Christian saints/' 
fully comprehending the non-understandable hair-splitting theolog- 
ical distinction between pious "dulia" and idolatrous "latria," as de- 
fined by Holy Church and droned by CE. in its article on Idolatry. 
And vast hordes of utterly illiterate and stupid Faithful go into the 
True Churches every day, kneel before and pray to these same Pagan 
gods conjured into Christian saints with countless other counterfeit 
near-divinities of their near-Idolatry and appreciate the difference 
to a split-second of devotion and true Faith. 'Tis passing strange. 

A very remarkable confession of purposeful fraud, with the me- 
chanics of the fraud, and the vast extent of it in faking Pagan 
miracle-lies into Christian truth of the most driveling nonsense, reads : 

"Manifold as the varieties of [miracle] legends now seem to be, there 
are fundamentally not so very many different notions utilized. The legend 
considers the saint as a kind of lord of the elements, who commands the 
water, rain, fire, mountain, and rock; he changes, enlarges, or diminishes 
objects; flies through the air; delivers from dungeons (examples, Peter, 
Paul} and gallows ; takes part in battles, and even in martyrdom is in- 
vulnerable ; animals, the wildest and the most timid, serve him (e. g. 9 the 
stories of the bear as a beast o burden ; the ring in the fish ; the frogs be- 
coming silent, etc.) ; his birth is glorified by a miracle; a voice, or letters, 
from Heaven proclaim his identity [all these score for Jesus the Christ] ; 
bells ring of themselves ; the heavenly ones enter into personal intercourse 
with him (betrothal of Mary) ; he speaks with the dead and beholds heaven, 
hell, and purgatory; forces the devil to release people from compacts; he 
is victorious over dragons; etc. Of all this the authentic [ ?] Christian nar- 
ratives know nothing [a confession that every saint-tale of Bible and 
Church is a lie]. 

"But whence does this world of fantastic concepts arise? A glance at 
the pre-Christian religious narratives will dispel every doubt. All these 
stories are anticipated by the Greek chroniclers, writers of myths, collec- 
tors of strange tales, neo-Platonism, and neo-Pythagorism. One need only 
refer to the 'Ellados Periegesis* of Pausanius, or glance through the codices 
collected by Photius in his 'Bibliotheca/ to recognize what great impor- 
tance was attached to the reports of miracle* in antiquity by both the edu- 
cated and uneducated." . . . 

Reversing only the order of the sentences, and CE. reversing the 
truth of the answer it gives to its own question, the confession of 
shame continues : 


"But how was the transference of [these miracle] legends to Christi- 
anity consummated? . . . Hellenism had already recognized this 
[ fraudulent] characteristic of the religious f able, and would thus have been 
obliged to free itself from it in the course of time, had not the competition 
with Christianity forced the champions of the ancient polytheism to seek 
again in the ancient fables incidents to set against the miraculous power 
of Christ. [ ! ] In this way popular illusions found their way from Hellenism 
to Christianity." (CE. ix, 129-30.) 

And in 1900 years no priest, bishop, pope, depositaries and guar- 
dians of divine truth, has ever said a word to prevent or put end to 
this shameful prostitution of mind of their poor grovelling dupes, 
but to this day perpetuate them in it. Far from ending the shameful 
thing, many bishops and popes have won the title Mendax MaaAmus 
by peddling these Pagan lies as God's truth ; as witness this one in- 
stance from the article we are quoting: "St. Augustine (De Cura 9 
xii) and also [Pope] St. Gregory the Great (Dialogues, IV, xxxvi) 
[the greatest book of Lies outside the Bible] relate of a man, 
who died by an error of the Angel of Death and was again restored to 
life, the same story which is already given by Lucian in his 
TPhilopseudes.' ** (Ib. p. 130.) Such, verily for shame, is "that new 
Paganism later called Christianity." 

Mythology has well been called the Theology of dead religions. 
The world is a vast cemetery of deceased gods and teeming scrap- 
heap of decayed and discarded priest-imposed religious beliefs 
superstitions. All the dead gods and religions of Paganism, all the 
yet surviving but fast moribund deities and faiths of the XXth Cen- 
tury world, all (except the Jews and Christians say, their own), 
all were admittedly the fraudulent handiwork of priests and profes- 
sional god-and-myth makers. In a word, short and ugly, but true 
every priest of every god and religion (saving, for the nonce, the 
Jewish-Christian ones) was a conscious and unconscionable falsi- 
fier and impostor, a common liar for his god. All plied their artful, 
unholy priestcraft in the name of gods for power and pelf, those 
grafting Pagan priests. No Christian will, or truthfully can, deny 
this portentous fact. The verdict of lying guilt of Pagan Priestcraft 
is unanimous. 

No one can now doubt that Lecky, after voluminous review of pre- 


Christian frauds and impostures, spoke the precise historical truth : 
"Christianity floated into the Roman Empire on the wave of credu- 
lity that brought with it this long train of Oriental superstitions and 
legends. " (Hist, of European Morals 9 i, 373-4.) 

The mainstream of Oriental superstition and priestly imposture 
will now be seen to swell with the turgid flood of Hebrew fables and 
forgery, before pouring the mingled flood of myth and fraud into the 
pure tide of Christian Truth; where, Presto! change! it is beheld 
transformed "baptized" into the "revealed mysteries" and "Cath- 
olic Truth" of God ! 



"Hinneh lash-sheqer as ah et sheqer sepharim Behold,, the lying pen of 
the scribes hath wrought lies." Jeremiah, viii, 8. 

STJNDBY HOLT HEBREW men of old, we are told on the authority of 
the name of the pseudo-first Jewish-Christian Pope, "spake as 
they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter, i, 21). These 
literary movings of the Spirit were sometime reduced to writing in 
"Sacred Scriptures"; and again later Christian authority assures: 
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Tim. iii, 16), 
though this is a falsified rendition ; the true reading is : "Every scrip- 
ture suitable for edification is divinely inspired," as the original 
Greek text is quoted by Father Tertullian. (ANF. iv, 16.) 

t lt is the popular supposition that the 66 (Catholic Bible 73) 
"little books" which comprise the Bible as we know it, are the whole 
sum of Hebrew and Christian "sacred writings," which have claimed 
and have been accorded the sanction of Divine inspiration and 
"treated by the Church as canonical." The term "canonical" in ec- 
clesiastical parlance means Books accepted as divinely inspired; 
books which "were definitely canonized, or adjudged to have a 
uniquely Divine or authoritative quality," as is the authorative 
definition. (CE. iii, 267.) "Canonicity depends on inspiration." (EB. 
i, 653.) The holy Hebrew "canon" was closed, or the last inspired 
Book of the Old Testament written, according to Jewish "Tradition," 
by Ezra, about 444* B. c. (76. i, 658, 662.) In truth, however, several 
of the Books of the Old Testament were written much later, and were 
never heard of by Ezra ; and "some found their way in, others not, on 
grounds of taste the taste of the period," says Wellhausen. (Ein- 
leitimg, p. 652, 6th Ed.) 

The popular idea is that when the "moving" of the above inspired 



66 sacred writings was ended, the moving Spirit retired from the field 
of Hebrew, and later of Christian literature, and thus closed the 
"sacred canon" of the respective Hebrew and Christian Testaments. 
This will be seen to be a mistake, in the judgment of the True Chris- 
tian Church, according to which the Jews evidently did not know 
their own inspired writings, and curiously omitted from their 
"canon" a number of divinely "moved" books and scraps of books, 
which the better-instructed Christian Church has adopted as full 
of inspiration into its own present official Bible, as we shall notice 
in its place. There is also a much greater number of such books, of 
both Hebrew and Christian origin, which the inspired Church for- 
merly and for ages regarded as inspired and "canonical," but which 
it now repudiates as "apocryphal" and acknowledges as forgeries; 
as we shall also duly note. 

There is, indeed, an immense mass of religious writings, the work 
of Jewish or Christian priests or professional religious persons, or 
composite productions of both sets of forgers, which are generally 
known as "apocrypha" or pious forgeries ; but which each and all 
have been held by the Church through many ages- of faith as of the 
highest inspired sanctity and accredited with the full rank of "canon- 
ical" truth of God. 

The term apocryphal or forged "takes in those compositions 
which profess to have been written either by Biblical personages or 
men in intimate relation with them." (CE. i, 601.) "Since these 
[apocryphal] books were forgeries^ the epithet in common parlance 
today denotes any story or document which is false or spurious; 
. . . apocryphal in the disparaging sense of bearing names to 
which they have no right; all come under the definition above, for 
each of them has at one time or another been treated as canonical" 

That the above 66 (or 73) Books of the accepted Bible of Chris- 
tianity come exactly, both as to manner of spurious origin and matter 
of fictional content, within the above definition of apocrypha or 
forgery, shall be made exceedingly evident* A brief review of these 
acknowledged religious forgeries in the name of God and of his in- 
spired biographers, will afford a curious and instructive study of the 
workings of the fervid, credulous and contorted priestly mind* reck- 


less of truth, and shed a floodlight of understanding on the origins 
and incredibility of the so-called "canonical" Books of the Bible, He- 
brew and Christian alike. 

While speaking here immediately of the Jewish Apocrypha or 
pious forgeries, it is to be noted and borne in mind that it is the 
Holy-Ghost-guided True Christian Church which alone has accepted 
and cherished these spurious productions of Jewish priestcraft 
(scornfully repudiated by the Jews), has adulterated and re-forged 
them to more definite deceptive purposes of Christian propaganda, 
and has outdone Jewry by adding innumerable like forgeries, "a 
whole literature" of fabrications to its own spurious hagiographa, 
or sacred writings. There will thus occur some necessary and unavoid- 
able over-lappings of Jewish and Christian forgeries in the course of 
our treatment. 

"It must be confessed, 5 ' admits the Catholic Encyclopedia, "that 
the early Fathers and the Church, during the first three centuries, 
were more indulgent towards Jewish pseudographs [. e. forged writ- 
ings] circulating under venerable Old Testament names. The Book 
of Henoch [Enoch] and the Assumption of Moses had been cited by 
the canonical Epistle of Jude. Many Fathers admitted the inspiration 
of Fourth Esdras. Not to mention the Shepherd of Hernias, the Acts 
of St. Paul (at least in the Thecla portion) and the Apocalypse of 
St. Peter were highly revered at this and later periods. ... In the 
Middle Ages . . . many pseudographic [i. e. forged] writings en- 
joyed a high degree of favor among both clerics and laity." (CE. i, 

A curious and edifying side-light on the chronic clerical flair for 
forgery is thrown by a sentence from the paragraph above quoted 
from the Catholic Encyclopedia. The earliest papal decree condemn- 
ing certain of these pious forgeries is itself a Christian forgery ! "The 
so-called 'Decretwm de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris, 9 which 
contained a catalogue of some half-hundred works condemned as 
apocryphal, was attributed to Pope Gelasius (495), but, in reality 
is a compilation dating from the beginning of the sixth century." 
(CE. i, 615.) 

And, be it noted, these Christian forgeries were not at all con- 
demned by the Church as forgeries and pious lies, but simply because 



they contained some dogmatic doctrines which were regarded by the 
Orthodox as "heresies"; they were condemned "always, however, 
with a preoccupation against heresy." And again in the same article : 
"Undoubtedly it was the large use heretical circles, especially the 
Gnostics, made of this insinuating literature, which first called out 
the animadversions of the official guardians of doctrinal purity." 
(Ib. p. 615.) 

The same authority cautiously and clerically explains, that "an- 
cient literature, especially in the Orient, used methods much more 
free and elastic than those permitted by our modern and occidental 
culture. Pseudographic [falsified] composition was in vogue among 
the Jews in the two centuries before Christ and for some time later. 
This holds good for the so-called 'Wisdom of Solomon,' written in 
Greek and belonging to the Church's sacred canon. [This admits 
that this book of the Catholic Bible is spurious.] In other cases, where 
the assumed name did not stand as a symbol of a type of a certain 
kind of literature, the intention was not without a degree of at least 
literary dishonesty." (Ib. p. 601.) 

Apocryphal religious literature consists of several classes, one 
of the most important subdivisions being that designated as "apoca- 
lyptic," and which consists of "pretended prophecies and revelations 
of both Jewish and Christian authorship, and dating from about 200 
B. c. to about 150 A. D.," the latter being the approximate date of 
the now "canonical" Books of the New Testament. Their general 
subject is the problem of the final triumph of what is called the King- 
dom of God. Speaking particularly of the apocalypses, the best 
known of which are the Hebrew Book of Daniel, written about 165 
B. c., and the Jewish-Christian Book of Revelation imputed to the 
Apostle John of Patmos, a recent secular authority (corroborated 
at all points by clerical authorities) points out that many if not all 
of the Jewish apocalypses are adulterated with "alterations and inter- 
polations by Christian hands, making the alleged predictions point 
more definitely to Jesus," which pious tampering "gave certain of 
these Jewish works a very wide circulation in the early Church. . . . 
The revelations and predictions are set forth as though actually re- 
ceived and written or spoken by ancient worthies, as Enoch, Moses, 
etc. . . They were once widely accepted as genuine prophecies, and 


found a warm reception in Jewish and early Christian circles." (The 
New International Encyclopedia, vol. i, p. 745.) This form of pious 
fraud is admitted as quite the expected thing: "Naturally basing 
itself upon the Pentateuch and the Prophets, it clothed itself ficti- 
tiously with the authority of a patriarch or prophet who was made 
to reveal the transcendent future 55 (CE. i, 602), most usually long 
ex post -facto. 

The vast and varied extent of Jewish-Christian forgery of religious 
books is shown by the groupings under which the several kinds of 
apocrypha forgeries are quite exhaustively considered in the tech- 
nical works treating of them, such as the Catholic Encyclopedia and 
the Encyclopedia Biblica, as well as the more popular Britannica and 
New International Encyclopedias, where the subject is fully discussed. 
"Speaking broadly,'* says the first, "The Apocrypha of Jewish origin 
are coextensive with what are styled of the Old Testament, and those 
of Christian origin with the apocrypha of the New Testament. The 
subject will be treated ["according to their origin 5 *] as follows: 
(I) Apocrypha of Jewish origin; (II) Jewish apocrypha with 
Christian accretions; (III) apocrypha of Christian origin, com- 
prising (1) apocryphal Gospels; (2) Pilate literature and other 
apocrypha concerning Christ; (3) apocryphal Acts of Apostles; 
(4) apocryphal doctrinal works; (5) apocryphal Epistles; (6) 
apocryphal Apocalypses; (IV) the apocrypha and the Church." 
(CE. i, 601.) 

What a catalogue of confessed ecclesiastical forgery and fraud in 
the name of God, Christ and his Apostles, and the Church of God, for 
the propaganda of priestly frauds as "our Most Holy Faith" 1 

What will probably in view of the foregoing and what is yet to 
come be appreciated by many as a peculiarly rare bit of apocrypha 
(in its secondary sense), is the following, uttered apparently with the 
due and usual ecclesiastical solemnity, in the celebrated Dictatus of 
Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085), stating the presumptuous pretenses 
of the Papacy: 

"The Roman Church has never erred* nor will it err to all eternity. No 
one may be considered a Catholic Christian who does not agree with the 
Catholic Church. No book is authoritative unless it has received the papal 
sanction. . . . 



"The pope is the only person whose feet are to be kissed by all princes" ; 
"the Pope may depose emperors and absolve subjects from allegiance 
to an unjust ruler." (Cited by Robinson, The Ordeal of Civilization, pp. 
126, 128; Library of Original Sources, vol. iv, p. 320-321.) 

This puts the stamp of canonical inspiration and verity on some 
dozen Jewish books and parts of books of the Catholic Bible which 
the Jews and the whole body of otherwise discordant sects of Protes- 
tants hesitate not unanimously to pronounce apocryphal and forged. 
These "apocrypha 5 * are either entire rejected Jewish books, all 
doubtless with Christian "interpolations," or apocryphal chapters 
or parts, interpolated probably by the same industry into the equally 
apocryphal books of the accepted Jewish canon. The names of these 
books, originals and interpolations, and which are not included in the 
Hebrew Old Testament, but are in the True Church Bible, are: 
Tobit, Judith, Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah, Wisdom of Solo- 
mon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach ( or Ecclesiasticus) , I and II Mac- 
cabees, Prayer of Manasseh, Additions to Esther, and Additions to the 
Book of Daniel, consisting of the Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the 
Three Holy Children (in the Fiery Furnace) , the History of Susannah, 
the History of Bel and the Dragon, and sundry such precious fables. 
(See CE. iii, pp. 267, 270 ; iv, 624, passim.) These are all included in 
the Greek Septuagint and in the Latin Vulgate, were read as Scripture 
in the early Christian Church, and were declared by the Council of 
Trent, at its Fourth Session, in 1546, under the Curse of God on all 
skeptical doubters, to be "inspired and canonical" ; and they are so 
held by the Roman, and some of the Greek and Oriental Catholic 
Churches, but are declared "apocrypha 5 * and forged by Jewry and 
all the rest of Christendom. To several of these 6ztfr#-revelations of 
Judaism included in the Christian True Bible, head-notes apologetic 
for their inclusion are attached, of which that to the celebrated Book 
of Tobit or Tobias is typical : "Protestants have left it out of their 
modern Bibles, alleging that it is not in the canon of the Jews. But the 
Church of Christ, which received the Scriptures not from the Jews, 
but from the Apostles of Christ, [who were all Jews, to believe the 
Christian record] by traditions from them, has allowed this book a 
place in the Christian [sic] Bible from the beginning." (See Cath. 


Bible, Tobit, et passim) . We may admire in synopsis the divine inspira- 
tion of 


This Book of Tobit, or Tobias, scoffed both by Jews and Protes- 
tants as a ridiculous fable, but held by all True Believers as a precious 
revelation of God, to disbelieve which is to be damned, is a veritable 
treasure-trove of exalted heavenly inspiration, for the preservation of 
which Jew and Gentile alike ma^ be dubiously grateful to the pious 
"tradition" of the Apostles of Christ, as above said. This Tobias was 
a very pious and stubborn Israelite of the Captivity, who, before de- 
parting, had cached all his available cash with his kinsman Gabelus, 
of Rages, a city of the Medes, "taking a note of his hand" for its re- 
payment on demand. While captive in a strange and pagan land, 
Tobias was visited by a piteous calamity, for "as he was sleeping, hot 
dung out of a swallow's nest fell upon his eyes, and hfe was made blind" ; 
which affliction Tobias looked reverently to the Lord as visiting upon 
him as "revenge for my sins" ; as a result Tobias became extremely 
poor, and his wife took in work. At that time there lived in the city of 
Rages another pious Israelite by name Raguel, who had a marriage- 
able or rather muchly married daughter, Sara, who was under grave 
reproach and even imputation of murder, "Because she had been given 
to seven husbands, and a devil named Asmodeus had killed them, at 
their first going in unto her," so that she complained that though 
sevenfold a widow she remained yet a virgin. 

At this juncture Tobias bethought himself of the good money he 
had left with Gabelus of Rages, and after much palaver decided to send 
his son, Tobias, Jr., a comely youth, with the note of hand in his 
pocket, and his dog (name unrevealed) , on the long journey to recoup 
the fortune of ten talents of silver. As Tobias, Jr. started on the jour- 
ney, a beautiful young man, who was really the Archangel Raphael, 
met him and introduced himself as Azarias, son of Ananias, (Ana- 
nias must have written the account) and offered to accompany and 
guide him upon his j ourney, which offer was gratefully accepted. As 
the two journeyed they came to the river Tigris; Tobias waded in to 
wash his feet, when, lo, "a monstrous fish came up to devour him," 
whereat Tobias called to his companion for help. The Angel told 



him to take the monster fish by the gill and haul him out, which Tobias 
seems to have had no trouble in doing. The Angel then directed Tobias 
to open the yet live and "panting" fish, "and lay up his heart, his gall, 
and his liver, for thee ; for these are necessary for useful medicines" ; 
this done, they cooked the fish and carried it all along for provisions 
for the trip. As they journeyed, Tobias asked the Angel what these 
medicinal scraps were good for; "and the Angel answering said, If 
thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof driveth 
away all kinds of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they 
come no more to them. And the gall is good for anointing the eyes, in 
which there is a white speck, and they shall be cured." 

So discoursing pleasantly and instructively, the twain arrived at 
Rages ; and the Angel guided Tobias straight to the house of Raguel 
and his daughter Sara, his sole heiress, and told Tobias to ask for her 
in marriage. Tobias said that he was afraid of Sara, for he had heard 
of what happened! to those seven other men ; but the Angel reassured 
him, that he would show him how to overcome the devil Asmodeus ; that 
he should marry Sara and go to bed with her for three nights, but 
should continently confine his activities "to nothing else but to prayers 
with her"; and, assured the Angel, on the first night "lay the liver 
of the fish on the fire, and the devil shall be driven away," other holy 
marvels happening on the succeeding nights; "and when the third 
night is past, thou shalt take the virgin with the fear of the Lord, 
moved rather for love of children than for lust," The affair was ar- 
ranged according to these prescriptions with Sara and her parents ; 
after the wedding supper, the newlyweds were left alone in their bou- 
doir ; Tobias did nothing but pray and put a part of the fish liver in 
the fire, whereupon "the Angel Raphael took the devil, and bound him 
in the desert of Upper Egypt" ; then both prayed some more, the fervid 
prayers being repeated verbatim. In the morning, Raguel, out of force 
of habit, called his servants and ordered them to go into the garden 
and dig an eighth grave for the reception of Tobias ; when the maid- 
servant went to the room to arrange for the removal of the corpse, she 
to her great surprise "found them safe and sound, sleeping both to- 
gether." The empty grave was filled up, a big banquet prepared, and 
the happy bridal couple spent two weeks with the bride's family, wliile 
the Angel took the note of hand, went to Gabelus, collected the money, 


and paid it over to Tobias; Raguel gave Tobias one-half of all 
his property, and executed a writing to give him one-half of the re- 
mainder upon the death of Raguel and wife. Tobias sent the Angel 
back to Gabelus, to invite him to his wedding, and the Angel made him 

To proceed swiftly to the climax of marvel, Tobias and the Angel, 
leaving the hymeneal cortege to follow as best it could, with such im- 
pedimenta of wealth, hastened back to the home of Tobias, Sr. 5 where 
blind father and the mother were in great grief over the supposed 
loss of their son and the money with him. But at the behest of the Angel, 
Tobias, Jr. ran into the house, though "the dog, which had been with 
them in the way, ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, 
showed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail," an act which 
has since become habitual with dogs which have enough tail to wag. 
After kissing his mother and father, as the Angel had suggested, To- 
bias, Jr. took the remaining fish gall out of his traveling bag, and 
anointed with it the eyes of his father ; "and he stayed about half an 
hour ; and a white skin began to come out of his eyes, like the skin of 
an egg. And Tobias took hold of it, and drew it from his eyes, and 
immediately he recovered his sight. And they glorified God, 9 * and 
Tobias, Sr. dutifully said, "I bless thee, Lord God of Israel, because 
thou hast chastised me, and thou hast saved me: and behold I see 
Tobias my son." Then, "after seven days Sara his son's wife, and all 
the family arrived safe, and the cattle, and the camels, and an abun- 
dance of money of his wife's, and that money also which he had re- 
ceived of Gabelus" ; they all feasted for seven days "and rejoiced with 
all great joy"; then, when Tobias, Sr. suggested doing something 
handsome for the "holy man" through whom all their good fortune 
had come, the Angel introduced himself as really not Azariah, son of 
Ananias, but "The Angel Raphael, one of the Seven, who stand before 
the Lord" ; and he explained, "I seemed indeed to eat, and to drink 
with you, but I use an invisible meat and drink, which cannot be seen 
by men"; thereupon in true angel style he dissipated into thin air 
and they could see him no more. The whole Tobias family then, "lying 
prostrate for three hours upon their face, blessed God : and rising up 
they told all his wonderful works." Thus endeth happily the reading 
of the lesson, dictated by the Holy Ghost to the pious Ananias who 



recorded it for the edification of True Believers. Let us pray that it 
is true. 


Until the Council of Trent, in 1546, there was no infallibly defined 
sanction of inspiration of these Jewish "apocrypha"; like the 
"canon" sacred Books of the Hebrew Bible, all alike were more or less 
eclectically accepted and used in the True Church ; but, as said : "The 
Tridentine decree from which the above list is extracted was the first 
infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, 
addressed to the Church universal. Being dogmatic in its purport, it 
implies that the Apostles bequeathed the same Canon to the Church as 
a part of the depositum fidei. . . . We should search the pages of the 
New Testament in vain for any trace of such action. . . . We affirm 
that such a status points to Apostolic sanction, which in turn must 
have rested on revelation either by Christ or the Holy Spirit/ 5 (CE. 
iii, 270.) 

This is luminous clerical reasoning: a lot of anonymous Jewish 
fables, derided by Jews and all the rest of the world for want of even 
common plausibility of fact or truth, and as to which the "inspired" 
Christian Books said to emanate from Apostles, are silent as the 
grave, are declared after 1500 years to have the ear-marks of Apos- 
tolic sanction, which "must have" been founded on divine revelation 
to them "either by Christ or the Holy Spirit," which the Church 
claims are one and the same Person ; and it is curious that the "infal- 
lible" Council couldn't say which was which, but vaguely and uncer- 
tainly opined it must have "been one or the other. So much for infallible 
cock-suredness as to "inspiration" of Holy Scriptures. Even the Old 
Testament itself, says our logician of inspiration, "reveals no formal 
notion of inspiration," though, again, "the later Jews must have pos- 
sessed the idea." (/&. p. 269,) The cursory notice which we shall take 
of the Old Testament books will serve to confirm that they reveal no 
notion at all of inspiration ; that the later Jews must have had the idea 
that they were inspired, does not much help the case for them. 

In addition to these rejected Jewish books admitted into full canon- 
ical fellowship by the inerrant True Church, there are several other 


Jewish apocrypha which are only semi-canonical and admitted into 
a sort of bar-sinister fellowship with the legitimates. They have a 
place in the Orthodox Bible for the "edification" of the Faithful, but 
are usually printed in the Appendix as suggestive to the devout that 
they will not be damned for not fully believing these particular for- 

Among these are two very celebrated boots forged in the name of 
the great Restorer of Israel, Ezra, under the titles of Third and 
Fourth Esdras, as the name is written in the True Bibles. "Third 
Esdras," says the Encyclopedia, "is one of the three uncanonical 
books appended to the official edition of the Vulgate. ... It enjoyed 
exceptional favor in the early ages of the Church, being quoted as 
Scripture with implicit -faith by the leading Greek and Latin Fathers." 
(CE. i, 605.) In like errant faith was regarded its companion forgery, 
Fourth Esdras > of which the same-ecclesiastical authority says : "The 
personage serving as the screen of the author of this book is Esdras 
(Ezra). . . . Both Greek and Latin Fathers cite it as prophetical. 
. . . Notwithstanding this widespread reverence for it in early times, 
it is a REMARKABLE FACT that the book never got a foothold in 
the Canon or liturgy of the Church . . . and even after the Council 
of Trent, together with Third Esdras, it was placed in the appendix to 
the official edition of the Vulgate. . . . The dominant critical dating 
assigns it to a Jew writing in the reign of Domitian, A. D. 8198," 
the "screen" Ezra being gathered to his fathers since about 444 B. c* 
(76. p. 603-604 ; v, 537-8 ; EB. i, 653, 1393.) It is curious that 
it is regarded as "remarkable" that the Holy Ghost did not "fall" for 
this particular forgery, when it did for so many others ! 


A remarkable apocryphal tale relating to the Hebrew Scriptures 
is enshrined by pseudo-inspiration in chapter 14 of this Fourth of 
Esdras, regarding the miraculous restoration of Hebrew Holy Writ 
after its total perishment. In the calamity of the capture and de- 
struction of the Holy City by Nebuchadnezzar, 586 B. c., the Temple 
of Solomon was destroyed, together with the entire collection of the 



sacred Rolls of Scriptures, so that not a scratch of inspired pen re- 
mained to tell the tale of theocratic Hebrew history and its "re- 
vealed" religion. This inconsolable and apparently irreparable loss 
afflicted the holy People all the time of the Babylonian captivity. But 
upon their return to the restored City of God, and over a century 
after their loss, God, we are told in Fourth Esdras, inspired Ezra 
and commissioned him to reproduce the sacred lost Books, which, 
judging from the result of his inspired labors, were many more than 
the supposed twenty and two of the supposed old Hebrew Canon. Ac- 
cordingly Ezra, employing five scribes, dictated to them (from in- 
spired memory) the textual contents of the lost sacred Books, and 
in just forty days and nights reproduced a total of 94 sacred books, 
of which he designated 24 as the sacred canon, the remaining 70 being 
termed esoteric and reserved for the use of only the wisest. This in- 
spired fable was eagerly accepted for truth by the early Church 
Fathers, many of whom, from Irenaeus on, "admitted its inspiration" ; 
and it was frequently quoted and commented on as canonical by such 
Church luminaries as Tertullian, St. Ambrose, Clement Alexandren- 
sis, Origen, Eusebius, St. Jerome, et al$. 9 and was prevalently accepted 
as Scripture throughout the scholastic period. (EB. i, 654, 1392-94 ; 
CE.i, 537-8, 601, 615.) 

This legend, however, had, through a better understanding of "the 
powers of ordinary human memory,'* quite faded out by the time of 
the Reformation, but only to make way for a more modern and ration- 
alistic one, invented by the Jew Levita, who died in 1549. According 
to his new fable, Ezra and the Talmudic "Men of the Great Syna- 
gogue" simply united into one volume the 24 books which until that 
time had circulated separately, and divided them into the three great 
divisions yet recognized, of the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagio- 
grapha or holy writings. This fabulous statement of Levita "became 
the authoritative doctrine of the orthodoxy of the seventeenth and 
eighteenth centuries." (EB. i, 654.) This new legend is cited simply 
to show how prone is the credulous clerical mind to accept as truth 
the most baseless fables ; and how, when one of their precious bubbles 
of faith is pricked by tardy exposure or common sense, they eagerly 
catch at the next which comes floating by. 



Another ancient priestly fiction, which to this day passes current 
among the credulous as inspired truth of God, is the fabled "finding 
of the Law" as recorded in the Word of God. We are all familiar with 
the notable "finding" by the late lamented Prophet Joseph Smith 
thereto led by the Angel Moroni of the golden plates containing the 
hieroglyphic text of Book of Mormon, near Palmyra, N. Y. in 1823^ 
1827. (Book of Mormon, Introd.) History repeated itself. A like 
remarkable discovery was made in the year 621 B. c., this time by 
a priest, with the help of a witch or lady fortune-teller. As related in 
2 Kings xxii, corroborated by 2 Chronicles xxxiv, in the eighteenth 
year of the "good king" Josiah of Judah, while some repair work 
was being done in the Temple, Hilkiah the priest of a sudden "found 
the book of the law of Yahveh given by Moses," over 800 years before, 
and never heard of since. Hilkiah called in Shaphan the scribe, and 
they took the great "find" to Josiah the King. To verify the veracity 
of the high-priest, Huldah the lady prophet was consulted ; being in- 
timately familiar with the sentiments of God, she at once declared 
that Yahveh was very angry about it, "because," as the King said, 
"our fathers have not hearkened unto the words of this book, to do 
after all that is written in this book" ; and the King at once set about 
to carry into effect the laws prescribed in Deuteronomy, just then 
for the first time in the history of Israel ever heard of or acted upon. 
This "book of the law given to Moses" 800 years before was doubtless 
the priestly work of Hilkiah, palmed off under the potent name of 
Moses to force its very reluctant observance and belief on the supersti- 
tious Jews. That this is the fact is the consensus of the scholars, as 
summarized in the Encyclopedia Biblica, and any modern work of 
O. T. criticism. An examination of the Bible texts themselves, as made 
in my previous work, demonstrates that this holy "Law of Moses" was 
totally unknown and unobserved through all the history of Israel 
from its beginnings until Josiah, and was then composed by his priests 
and enlarged into the present Pentateuch during and after the cap- 
tivity in Babylon. 



As priestly forged tales were fabricated to account for the origin 
and preservation of the sacred Hebrew Books, so like pious fraud was 
adopted to account for their very notable translation into Greek, in 
what is known as the Septuagint Version. After the conquests by 
Alexander the Great and his establishment of the city of Alexandria 
in Egypt, immense numbers of Jews were settled in the new city, which 
quickly became the commercial and intellectual center of the ancient 
world, with Greek the universal language. The holy Hebrew language 
had become a dead language to the Jews of the "Dispersion" ; their 
synagogue services could not be conducted in the mother tongue. 
The Alexandrian Jews were accordingly under necessity to render the 
"Law" into Greek for their public use ; and this was gradually done 
by such of them as thought themselves able to do such work. But this 
common-place mode of rendering the sacred Hebrew into a Gentile 
speech did not satisfy the pious wonder-craving Jewish mind. Ac- 
cordingly, somewhere about 200 B. c., an anonymous Jew invented 
a more satisfactory tale, which has had incalculable influence on the 
Christian faith and dogmas. This pious Israelite had the customary 
recourse to religious forgery ; he forged a letter in the name of one 
Aristeas, an official of Ptolemy II, Philadelphus, the Greek king of 
Egypt, 285-247 B. c., purporting to be addressed to his brother, 
Philocrates, and giving a marvelous history of the Translation. 

Here, in substance, is what we read of the first origin of the Version, 
limited therein to the "Law" of Moses, as first related by Josephus. 
Ptolemy had recently established a library at Alexandria, which he 
purposed should contain a copy of every obtainable literary work 
extant. This Library became the most extensive and celebrated of the 
ancient world, containing some 700,000 manuscript books at the 
time it was savagely destroyed, in 391 A. D., by the benighted Christian 
zeal and fury of Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria and his crazy monks 
of Nitria, as related in Kingsley's Hypatia or any history of the times* 
(CE. xiv, 625.) At the suggestion of Demetrius, his Librarian, fables 
the pseudo-Aristeas through Josephus, that he should enrich the 
Library with a copy of the sacred Law of the Jews, Ptolemy wrote to 
Eleazar the chief priest at Jerusalem, sending the letter and 


nificent presents "to God" by the hand of a delegation including 
Aristeas, requesting a copy of the Law and a number of learned Jews 
competent to translate it into Greek. The embassy was successful ; 
a richly ornamented copy of the holy Law, written in letters of gold, 
was sent to the King, together with seventy-two Doctors of Israel, 
deputed to deliver the Book and to carry out the wishes of the King. 
They were received with great honor, says pseudo-Aristeas, and 
duly feted for several days ; they were then conducted across the long 
causeway to the Island of Pharos to the place which was prepared 
for them, 'Svhich was a house that was built near the shore, and was 
a quiet place, and fit for their discoursing together about their work. 
. . . Accordingly they made an accurate interpretation, with great 
zeal and great pains," working until the ninth hour each day, and 
visiting Ptolemy every morning. "Now when the Law was transcribed, 
and the labour of interpretation was over, which came to its conclusion 
in seventy-two days," the work was read over to the assembled Jews, 
who rejoiced that "the interpretation was happily finished"; they 
were enjoined to report any errors or omissions which they might dis- 
cover, to the "Seventy," who would make the necessary corrections in 
their work. (Josephus, Antiq. Jews, Bk. XII, chap. 2; CE. xiii, 722.) 
Thus the translation was only of "The Law," the Five Books of Moses ; 
and it was open team-work, all the Seventy-two working together, 
comparing and discussing as they proceeded, and expressly enjoin- 
ing the Jews to note and report for correction all errors of omission 
or commission which they might discover. 

Thus the pseudo-Aristeas, as cited by Josephus ; though, as a mat- 
ter of fact, this Septuagint Version, so-called because of the legend- 
ary Seventy- (two), was in the grossest manner inaccurate, and im- 
ported innumerable errors into the Christian religion which was 
based upon and propagated for several centuries only through the 
Septuagint texts. Indeed, "the text of the Septuagint was regarded 
as so unreliable, because of its freedom in rendering, and of the alter- 
ations which had been introduced into it, etc., that, during the second 
century of our era it was discarded by the Church." (CE. iv, 625.) 
We shall notice the fearful error of Isaiah's "virgin-birth" text; 
for other well-known instances, it makes out Creation 1195 years 
earlier than the Hebrew and Vulgate, 4004 B. c., and the vener- 



able Methuselah is made to survive the Flood by fourteen years. 

Despite, however, its patently legendary character, the pseudo- 
Aristeas' account, the forged letter and the story, were eagerly ac- 
cepted as genuine and authentic by Fathers, Popes and ecclesiastic 
writers until the sixteenth century, when their spurious character 
was revealed by the nascent modern criticism. "The authenticity of 
the letter, called in question first by Louis Vives (1492-1540), pro- 
fessor at Louvain, is now universally denied." (CE. xiii, 722.) 

The Fathers, however, could not rest content with this unvarnished 
original fabrication in the name of Aristeas, of an ordinary human 
and errant translation of the "Law" ; they avidly set about embellish- 
ing it in the accepted clerical style, adding fanciful and lying details 
to emphasize the miraculous and inspired origin of the Version. As 
this notable instance serves admirably to illustrate the childish and un- 
critical credulity of the Fathers, their reckless disregard of truth, 
their chronic zest for any untruth or fable suitable to pander to the 
glory of God and enhance the pious superstition of the Faithful, let 
us here watch the growth of this simple human yarn of the Jewish 
Aristeas-f orger into the wonderful and ever more embellished miracle 
as it passes from Father to Father, exactly as the Gospel-fables grew 
from "Mark" to "John." According to Fathers Tertullian, St. Augus- 
tine, St. Jerome, et als.> the 72 were inspired by God each severally 
for the entire work; in translating they did not consult with one 
another; they had been shut up incomwnicados in separate cells on 
Pharos, either singly or in pairs, and their several translations, when 
finished and compared, were found to agree entirely both as to sense 
and the expressions employed, with the original Hebrew text and with 
each other (St. Clement of Alexandria, St. Irenseus, Justin Martyr). 
Finally, the 72 translated not only the Law, but the entire Old Testa- 
ment, several of whose Books were not yet at the time written. 

Father Justin Martyr adds near-eye-witness verification to the 
false and already embroidered history, saying that the "Seventy" 
were, by order of the King, "shut up in as many separate cells, and 
were obliged by him, each to translate the whole Bible apart, and 
without any communication with each other, yet all their several 
translations were found to agree verbatim from the beginning to the 
end, and were by that means demonstrated to be of divine inspira- 


tion" ; and he adds, for confirmation of faith ! like Paul, protesting 
he is not lying in anticipation of the accusation : "These things, ye 
men of Greece, are no fable, nor do we narrate fictions ; but we our- 
selves having been in Alexandria, saw the remains of the little [cells] 
at the Pharos still preserved. 53 (Ad Grac. ch. xiii; ANF. i, 278-9.) 
But in repeating the tale to the Roman Emperor, Father Justin 
makes the unhappy blunder of saying, that Ptolemy "sent to Herod, 
who was at that time king of the Jews, requesting that the books of 
the prophets [pseudo-Aristeas said the "Law"] be sent to him; and 
the king did indeed send them" (I Apol. ch. xxxi; ANF. i, 173) ; 
whereas Herod lived some 300 years after Ptolemy died. This forged 
fable is time and again repeated as sober truth. Bishop Saint Ire- 
naeus emphasizes the miraculous nature of the translation of att the 
Books, saying that when the 72 identical translations were compared, 
"God was indeed glorified, and the Scriptures were acknowledged as 
truly divine ; . . . even the Gentiles present perceived that the Scrip- 
tures had been interpreted by the inspiration of God. And there was 
nothing astonishing in God having done this. . . . He inspired Es- 
dras the priest (after the return from captivity) to recast all the 
words of the former prophets, and to re-establish with the people of 
God the Mosaic legislation." (Adv. Hter. Ill, xxi, 2; ANF. i, 

In the course of a century or two before the Christian Era, the 
other Hebrew sacred books were likewise translated into Greek for 
the use of the Greek-speaking Jews of "the Dispersion," together with 
numbers of the forged Jewish apocrypha, and all these were added 
to the rolls of "Scriptures." This final and adulterated form of the 
Septuagint "was the vehicle which conveyed these additional Scrip- 
tures [i. e. the apocryphal Tobias, etc.] into the Catholic Church." 
(CE. iii, 271.) This vagary of the Holy Ghost in certifying the ill- 
translated and tampered Septuagint for the foundations of Christian 
Faith, was very disastrous, as CE. points out: "The Church had 
adopted the Septuagint as its own ; this differed from the Hebrew not 
only by the addition of several books and passages but also by in- 
numerable variations of text, due partly to the ordinary process 
of corruption in the transcription of ancient books, partly to the 
culpable temerity, as Origen called it, of correctors who used not a 



ittle freedom in making 'corrections,' additions, and suppressions, 
>artly to mistakes in translation, and finally in great part to the 
act that the original Septuagint had been made from a Hebrew text 
uite different from that fixed at Jamnia as the one standard by the 
Wish Rabbis." (CE. vii, 316.) So Yahveh only knows what he actu- 
lly said and did in the 4004 years up to the time his Son came to try 

"redeem" his people from some of the tangles of his Holy Law. 
Matters grew worse as time progressed : the ex-Pagan Greek Fa- 

iers who founded Christianity, propagated the new Faith for several 
snturies only from the tortuous texts of this falsified Septuagint, 
hich was the only Old Testament "Scriptures" known to and used by 
lem as the source of the "prophecies fulfilled by Jesus Christ" and the 
% mysteries of the Jewish-Christian Faith. "Copies of the Septua- 
int," says CE., "were multiplied, and, as might be expected, many 
ianges, deliberate as well as involuntary, crept in." (CE. xiii, 723.) 
ideed, the itch for Scripture-scribbling was so rife among such ex- 
agan Christians as could write and get hold of a copy, that St, 
ugustine complains: "It is possible to enumerate those who have 
anslated the Scriptures from Hebrew into Greek, but not those who 
ive translated them into Latin. In sooth, in the early days of the 
ith whoso possessed a Greek manuscript and thought he had some 
lowledge of both tongues was daring enough to undertake a transla- 
on." (DeDoct. Christ. II, xi; CE. ix, 20.) So the Faith was founded 

1 befuddlement of the Blessed Word of God as any nondescript scrib- 
er palmed it off to be. 

We shall more than abundantly see that Holy Church never pos- 
ssed or used a single book of "Scripture" or other document of im- 
>rtance, to the glory of God and the glorification of the Church, 
rich was not a rank original forgery and bristled besides with "many 
liberate changes" or forged interpolations. 


The most colossal of the blunders of the Septuagint translators, 
pplemented by the most insidious, persistent and purposeful falsi- 
ation of text, is instanced in the false translation of the notoriously 
Ise pretended "prophecy" of Isaiah vii, 14, frauds which have had 


the most disastrous and fatal consequences for Christianity, and to 
humanity under its blight ; the present exposure of which should in- 
stanter destroy the false Faith built on these frauds. 

The Greek priest who forged the "Gospel according to St. Mat- 
thew," having before him the false Septuagint translation of Isaiah, 
fables the Jewish Mary yielding to the embraces of the Angel Gabriel 
to engender Jesus, and backs it up by appeal to the Septuagint trans- 
lation of Isaiah vii, 14 : 

"Behold, a virgin shall be with child^ and shall bring forth a son, and they 
shall call his name Emmanuel." (Matt, i, 23.) 

Isaiah's original Hebrew, with the mistranslated words under- 
scored, reads: "Hinneh ha-almah harah ve-yddeth ben ve-karatf& 
shem-o immanuel"; which, falsely translated by the false pen of 
the pious translators, runs thus in the English: "Behold, a virgin 
shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" (Isa. 
vii, 14.) The Hebrew words ha-almah mean simply the young woman; 
and harah is the Hebrew past or perfect tense, "conceived," which in 
Hebrew, as in English, represents past and completed action. Hon- 
estly translated, the verse reads : "Behold, the young woman has con- 
ceived [is with child] and "be&Teth a son and c&lleth his name 

Almah means simply a young woman, of marriageable age, whether 
married or not, or a virgin or not; in a broad general sense exactly 
like girl or maid in English, when we say shop-girl, parlor-maid, bar- 
maid, without reference to or vouching for her technical virginity, 
which, in Hebrew, is always expressed by the word bethulah. But in 
the Septuagint translation into Greek, the Hebrew cdmah was erro- 
neously rendered into the Greek parthSnos, virgin, with the definite 
article ha in Hebrew, and e in Greek, (the) , rendered into the indefinite 
"a" by later falsifying translators. (See Is It God's Word? pp. 277- 
279 ; EB. ii, 2162 ; New Commentary on the Holy Scripture, Pt. I, p. 
439.) And St. Jerome falsely used the Latin word virgo. 

"As early as the second century B. c.," says the distinguished He- 
brew scholar and critic, Salomon Reinach, "the Jews perceived the 
error <md pointed it out to the Greeks; but the Church knowingly per- 



sisted in the false reading, and for over fifteen centuries she has clung 
to her error." (Orpheus, p, 197.) The truth of this accusation of 
conscious persistence in known error through the centuries is proved 
by the confused confession of St. Jerome, who made the celebrated 
Vulgate translation from the Hebrew into Latin, and intentionally 
"clung to the error," though Jerome well knew that it was an error 
and false; and thus he perpetuated through fifteen hundred years 
the myth of the "prophetic virgin birth" of Jesus called the Christ. 

Being criticized by many for this falsification, St. Jerome thus 
replies to one of his critics, Juvianus : "I know that the Jews are ac- 
customed to meet us with the objection that in Hebrew the word 
Almah does not mean a virgin, but a young woman. And, to speak 
truth, a virgin is properly called Bethulah, but a young woman, or a 
girl, is not Almah, but Naarah"! (Jerome, Adv. Juvianum, I, 32; 
NfyPNF. vi, 370.) So insistent was the criticism, that he was driven 
to write a book on the subject, in which he makes a very notable con- 
fession of the inherent incredibility of the Holy Ghost paternity- 
story : "For who at that time would have believed the Virgin 9 s word 
that she had conceived of the Holy Ghost, and that the angel Gabriel 
had come and announced the purpose of God? and would not all have 
given their opinion against her as an adulteress, like Susanna? For at 
the present day, now that the whole world has embraced the faith, 
the Jews argue that when Isaiah says, ^Behold, a virgin shall conceive 
and bear a son, 3 the Hebrew word denotes a young woman, not a virgin, 
that is to say, the word is ALMAH, not BETHULAH"! (Jerome, 
The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary, N&PNF. vi, 336.) 

So the Greek Father or priest who forged the false "virgin-birth" 
interpolation into the manuscript of "Matthew," drags in maybe ig- 
norantly the false Septuagint translation of Isaiah vii, 14, which the 
Latin Father St. Jerome purposely perpetuated as a pious "lie to the 
glory of God." The Catholic and King James Versions purposely re- 
tain this false translation ; the Revised Version keeps it in, but with 
a gesture of honesty, which is itself a fraud, sticks into the margin in 
fine type, after the words "a virgin" and "shall conceive," the words, 
"Or, the maiden is with child and beareth," which not one in thou- 
sands would ever see or understand the significance of. So it is not 
some indefinite "a virgin" who 750 years in the future "shall conceive" 


and "shall bear" a son whose name she "shall call" Immanuel, or Jesus ; 
but it was some known and definite young female, married or un- 
married but not a "virgin" who had already conceived and was 
already pregnant, and who bea,reth a son and c&Ileth his name Im- 
manuel, . . . who should be the "sign" which "my lord" should give 
to Ahaz of the truth of Isaiah's false prophecy regarding the pending 
war with Israel and Syria, as related in Isaiah vii, and of which the 
total falsity is proven in 2 Chronicles xxviii, as all may read. 

Although Papal Infallibility has declared that "it will never be 
lawful to grant . . . that the sacred writers could have made a mis- 
take" (Leo XIII, Encyc. Provid. Deus; CE. ii, 543), yet, the fraud 
being notorious and exposed to the scorn of the world, and being 
driven by force of modern criticism, CE. definitely and positively 
though with the usual clerical soft-soaping, confesses this age-long 
clerical fraud and falsification of Holy Writ, and relegates it to the 
junk-heap of discredited but not discarded dogmatic myth: 

"Modern theology does not grant that Isaiah vii, 14, contains a real 
prophecy fulfilled in the virgin birth of Christ; it must maintain, there- 
fore, that St. Matthew misunderstood the passage when he said : *Now all 
this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the 
prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, 

Thus is apparent, and confessed, the dishonesty of "Matthew" 
and of the Church of Christ in perverting this idle, false and falsified 
text of Isaiah into a "prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ/ 5 
and in persisting in retaining this falsity in their dishonest Bibles as 
the basis of their own bogus theology unto this day of the Twentieth 
Century. The Church, full knowing its falsity, yet clings to this pre- 
cious lie of Virgin Birth and all the concatenated consequences. Thus 
it declares its own condemnation as false. Some other viciously false 
translations of sacred Scripture Trill be duly noticed in their place. 

As Thomas Jefferson prophetically wrote, as is being verified: 

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Su- 
preme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with 
the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" ! 




The marvels of the canonical apocrypha of the Hebrew sacred 
Books, or of the whole 94 miraculously "restored" by Ezra, could 
not slake the thirst of the Jewish intellect for such edifying histories, 
and their priests were very industrious in supplying the demands of 
piety and marvel-craving. Making use, as- above admitted, of the 
most "venerable Old Testament names," they forged a voluminous 
literature of fanciful and fantastic fairy-tales in the guise of sacred 
history, revelations, oracles or predictions, all solemnly "set forth as 
though actually received, and written or spoken by ancient worthies, 
as Enoch, Moses, etc., which were widely accepted as genuine, and 
found a warm reception in Jewish and early Christian circles." 
Scarcely is there a Biblical notable of Israel in whose name these pious 
false writings were not forged, including Adam and Eve, and most 
of the ante- and post-Diluvian Patriarchs. It is impossible here to 
much more than mention the names of some of the principal ones of 
these extra-canonical apocrypha and forgeries of the Jews, as listed 
in the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Encyclopedia Biblica, most of 
them worked over with surcharge of added Christian forgeries, to 
adapt them to their pious propaganda. 

The names of these "intriguing" volumes of forgotten lore, listed 
somewhat after the order of their distinguished pretended authors 
and times, are : Life of Adam and Eve ; Testament of Adam ; The 
Book of Creation; the Books of Seth (son of Adam) ; Book of Enoch 
(grandson of Adam) ; Secrets of Enoch ; Parables of Enoch ; Book of 
Lamech; Book of Noah; Book of Zoroaster (identified with Ham, 
son of Noah) ; Apocalypse of Noah ; Apocalypse of Abraham ; Testa- 
ment of Abraham; Testament of Isaac; Testament of Jacob; The 
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs ; Testament of the Three Pa- 
triarchs; Testament of Naphthali; The Prayer of Menasseh; The 
Prayer of Joseph; The Story of Asenath (wife of Joseph) ; Prayer 
of Asenath ; The Marriage of Asenath ; The Assumption of Moses ; 
The Testament of Moses ; Book of Jannes and Mambres (the Egyptian 
magicians with whom Moses contended) ; Penitence of Jannes and 
Mambres ; The Magical Books of Moses ; The Book of Jubilees, or 


Little Genesis ; Book of Og the Giant ; Treatise of the Giants ; Josip- 
pon ; Book of Jasher ; The Liber Antiquitatem Bibliaium, ascribed to 
Philo ; The Chronicles of Jerameel ; Testament of Job; Psalm CLI of 
David, "when he fought with Goliath" ; Testament of Solomon ; The 
Contradictio Salomonis (a contest in wisdom between Solomon and 
Hiram) ; The Psalms of Solomon; Apocalypse of Elijah; Apocalypse 
of Baruch; The Rest of the Words of Baruch; History of Daniel; 
Apocalypse of Daniel; Visions of Daniel; Additions to Daniel, viz.: 
The History of Susanna (Chap. 13), the Song of the Three Children, 
Story of Bel and the Dragon (Chap. 14) ; Tobit ; Judith; Additions 
to Esther; The Martyrdom of Isaiah; The Ascension of Isaiah; III 
and IV Esdras ; Apocalypse of Esdras ; Story of the Three Pagans, 
in I Esdras ; I, II, III, and IV Maccabees ; The Prophecy of Eldad 
and Medad ; Apocalypse of Zephaniah ; Stories of Artaphanus ; Eu- 
polemus; Story of Aphikia, wife of Jesus Sirach; The Letter of 
Aristeas to Philocrates ; The Sibylline Oracles. 

Quite half of the above Jewish false-writings, separately listed under 
the grouping of "Jewish with Christian Accretions,' 5 the Catholic 
Encyclopedia describes with comments such as "recast or freely inter- 
polated by Christians," "many Christian interpolations," etc., "pre- 
senting in their ensemble a fairly full Christology" (CjEJ. i, 606). If 
the pious Christians, confessedly, committed so many and so extensive 
forgeries and frauds to adapt these popular Jewish fairy-tales of 
their God and holy Worthies to the new Christian Jesus and his 
Apostles, we need feel no surprise when we discover these same Chris- 
tians forging outright new wonder-tales of their Christ under the 
fiction of the most noted Christian names and in the guise of inspired 
Gospels, Epistles, Acts and Apocalypses. 


The processes of the formation of the Hebrew Old Testament Scrip- 
tures are, however, interesting and intriguing, if sacred tradition is 
true. According to priestly lore, the man Moses, "learned in all the 
wisdom of the Egyptians" (another Christian assurance; Acts vii, 
22), sat down in the Wilderness of Sinai and under divine inspiration 
wrote his Five Books of prehistorical history, codes of post-exilic 


divine Law, and chronicles of contemporary and future notable events, 
including four different names of his father-in-law (viz. : Jethro, Ex. 
iii, 1 ; Reuel, Ex. ii, 18; Jether, Ex. iv, 18, and Raguel, Num. x, 29, 
while a fifth name, Hobab, is awarded him in Judges iv, 11), together 
with a graphic account of his own death and burial, and of the whole 
month afterwards spent by all Israel mourning his death. He also re- 
cords the death of his brother Aaron at Mt. Hor (Num. xx, 28 ; xxxiii, 
38), just six months before his own death; though, in amazing contra- 
diction, he elsewhere records Aaron as having died at Mosera, just 
after leaving Sinai (Deut. x, 6), thirty-nine years previously, and 
thus nullifies the entire history of the wonderful career and deeds of 
Aaron as high priest during the whole 40 years of wandering in the 
Wilderness, of which the Books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers are 
largely filled; as also many other matters and things occurring for 
some centuries after his death, and known as "post-Mo saica" to the 

Joshua, the successor of Moses, next wrote the history of his life 
and times, working in, too, a sketch of his own death and funeral ob- 
sequies (Josh, xxiv, 29-30), and quoting the celebrated miracle of the 
sun standing still, of which he says, "Is it not written in the Book of 
Jasher?" which Book of Jasher was not itself written until several 
hundred years later, at least in or after the time of David ; for it is 
recorded : "And he [David] bade them teach the children of Judah the 
use of the bow; behold, it is written in the Book of Jasher." (2 Sam. 
i, 18.) 

The Book of Judges was written by nobody knows whom, nor when, 
except that it was long "post-exilic.' 5 It relates that, "Now the chil- 
dren of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it" ( Jud. 
i, 18) ; whereas it was not until David had reigned seven years and six 
months in Hebron, that "the King and his men went to Jerusalem" 
and failed to capture it, "nevertheless, David took the stronghold of 
Zion, and called it the City of David." (2 Sam. v, 5-9.) It is further 
recorded in Judges that the tribe of Dan made a silver idol of the 
Hebrew God and hired a grandson of Moses to serve it, and "he and his 
sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the captivity of the land" 
(Jud. xviii, 30) about a thousand years later. 

The gifted Samuel, Prophet of the heathen High Places of Baal- 


worship, gives his name and inspiration to two books- of mythical 
history written piecemeal until the "return from captivity," as above 
indicated, and early in his work he records the historic episode of the 
calling up of his own ghost from the dead by the famous Witch of 
En-dor. (1 Sam. xviii, 1, 7-19.) 

The ex-bandit David, "man after God's own heart" after murder- 
ing a man to get his adulterous wife, and engendering of her his all-wise 
son and hero, Solomon, wrote the 150 songs of the Hebrew Hymn 
Book, many of his psalms singing of the long posthumous Babylonian 

Solomon himself, who was son-in-law to nearly everybody in the 
heathen nations round about who had eligible daughters, wrote the 
wisdom of the ages into his Book of Proverbs, though not one of them 
is by Solomon, and in his lighter (headed or hearted) spells penned his 
erotic Canticles, which for realistic lubricity quite outdo Boccaccio, 
and would be really unmailable under the Postal Laws if they weren't 
in the Holy Bible and clerically captioned "The Church's Love unto 
Christ." These are indeed but one collection out of the great many 
pornographic stories of The Holy Ghost's Decameron, enshrined in 
God's Holy Word for delectation of the Puritans of Faith, 

Other divinely inspired and anonymous writers, falsely entitling 
their effusions under the names of this or that Prophet or other wholly 
fictitious personage, as Job, Esther, Ruth, Daniel, gave forth yet 
other inspired histories, books of oracles or prophecies, apocalypses or 
high powered visions into Futurity, and a miscellany of sacred novels, 
love-stories and nondescript musings or ravings known collectively as 
the hagiographa or holy writings of the Jews. All these together, now 
thirty-nine in number, comprise the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament. 
It being out of question to review each of these here, it may be stated 
with assurance that not one of them bears the name of its true author ; 
that every one of them is a composite work of many hands "interpolat- 
ing" the most anachronistic and contradictory matters into the origi- 
nal writings, and often reciting as accomplished facts things which, 
occurred many centuries after the time of the supposed writer, as 
Psalms, Isaiah, Daniel, and the so-called "historical" books. For 
scientific detailed demonstration of this the Encyclopedia Biblica 
digests the most competent authorities ; my own Is It God's Word? 


makes the proofs from the sacred texts themselves. See the recent 
"Religious Book of the Month Club's" notable Unraveling the Book 
o/5oofo,byTrattner. (1929.) 

But as the Christian religion depends more vitally on Genesis and 
Moses than on all the other sacred writings and writers, we may ap- 
peal to the admissions of CE., thereto driven by force of modern crit- 
icism, for the destruction and abandonment of the Moses Mythus : 

"It is true that the Pentateuch, so long attributed to Moses, is now held 
by the vast majority of non-Catholic, and by an increasing number of 
Catholic, scholars to be a compilation of four independent sources put 
together in final shape soon after the Captivity." (CE. i, 622,) 

This scores strongly for Hebrew-Christian forgery and fraud in 
attributing this primitive system of Bible "science" and barbarous 
law to a god as a pretext for priestly domination of the superstitious 
people. That God-given forged law thus prescribes for priestcraft: 
*'The man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the 
priest, . . . even that man shall die." (Deut. xvii, 12.) The whole 
Five Books of Moses are thus a confessed forgery in the names of 
Moses and of God ; every one of the Thus saith the Lord a thousand 
times repeated, with speeches and laws put into the mouth of the God, 
are false and forged. Speaking of the "difficulty, in the present con- 
dition of Old Testament criticism, of recognizing more than a small 
portion of the Pentateuch as documentary evidence contemporary 
with Moses," who, if he ever lived, which may be confidently denied, 
never wrote a line of it, CE. further confesses to the natural evo- 
lution not the "divine revelation" of the Hebrew mythology into a 
(no less mythological) monotheistic religion : "The Hegelian principle 
of evolution . . . applied to religion, has powerfully helped to beget 
a tendency to regard the religion of Israel as evolved by processes not 
transcending nature, from a polytheistic worship of the elements to a 
spiritual and ethical monotheism." (CE. i, 493.) But this finally and 
very late evolved monotheism is neither a tardy divine revelation to the 
Jews, nor a novel invention by them ; it was a thousand years ante- 
dated by Amenhotep IV and Tut-ankh-amen in Egypt, nor were even 
they the pioneers. We have seen the admission that the Zoroastrian 
Mithra religion was "a divinely revealed Monotheism" (CE. ii, 156). 


But the Hebrews were confessed and notorious idolaters and polythe- 
ists until after the Captivity ; that fact is a thousand times alleged 
throughout the Scriptures as the sole reason for their troubles and 
captivity. As above suggested, and as thoroughly demonstrated by 
the texts in my other book, the Hebrew God Yahveh was but one of the 
many gods worshipped by the Hebrews ; and Yahveh never claimed 
more than to be a "God above all gods," to be preferred before them 
all; as at Sinai he enacted: "Thou shalt have no other gods before 
[in preference to] me," thus omitting the other gods. 


Contradictions throughout the Bible, Old and New Testaments 
alike, abound by the many thousands, and in virtually every book of 
both Testaments, as every one knows who has read the Bible 
even casually. See some thousand and more of the most notorious and 
vital ones are cited in "deadly parallel" in my Is It God's Word? as 
one of the most conclusive proofs of uninspired human origin and of 
confusion worse confounded of tinkering, "interpolation" and forgery 
outright, by the pious priests of Israel and Judah, and the Ezra 
"school" of forgers of the "Law and the Prophets." 

"It was a monk of the 6th century, named Dionysius Exiguus 
(Dennis the Little), who fixed our present Christian era, laying down 
that Jesus Christ was born on the 25th of December, A. u. c. 753, and 
commencing the new era from the following year, 754. That date, as 
we shall see, cannot be correct and, instead of being an improvement 
on, is farther from the truth than the dates assigned by the early 
Fathers, St. Irenaeus and Tertullian, who fixed the date of the Nativ- 
ity in the 41st year of Augustus, that is to say, 3 years B. c., or A. TT. c. 
751 . . . All this points to the fact that Herod died in the year 
4 B. c., and that our Saviour must have been born before that date 
. . . Our Saviour was born some time before Herod's death, probably 
two years or more. So that, if Herod died in the year 4 B. c., we should 
be taken to 6 or 7 B. c. as the year of the Nativity" (CE. 735-6). 

This, of course, discredits the date given by the inspiration of 



Luke, and demonstrates that both he and Matthew merely alleged 
fictitious dates for what in all human probability was a purely ficti- 
tious event. The new Era of Christ was, however, very slow in gaining 
recognition; the first official secular document dating by it was a 
charter of Charlemagne, after 800 A. D., and it did not come into gen- 
eral use until about 1000 A. D. I may mention a fiery sermon I once 
heard, in which the expounder of truth vindicated the glory of God 
by declaiming that every Jew and Infidel confessed to Jesus Christ 
every time he dated a letter or mentioned the year of an event. Being 
simply a hearer of the Word, I could not rise to suggest, that by the 
same token we confess more to the Pagan gods than to the Christian, 
for more than half the months and every day of the week are named 
for Pagan deities, and we name them much more often than we do the 
years of grace and salvation of Christ. After this bad start from Gos- 
pel error and contradiction, we now turn to further evidences of 
"Gospel truth" in contradictions and forgery. 

Among the most signal of these incessant contradictions and scien- 
tific impossibilities of Divine Inspiration, are those relating to the 
capital matter, for the credit of the Christian Religion, of the time 
and manner of Creation of earth and Man, based on Holy Writ and on 
the "chronology" worked out, with several hundred disparate results, 
from the inspired pedigrees of the ante-Diluvian Patriarchs. So fatally 
important is this to Christianity, that the True Church *Vhich 
never deceived anyone" and "has never erred," speaking through 
CE. t thus admits that Christianity stands or falls with "the literal, 
historical sense of the first three chapters of Genesis in as far as they 
bear on the facts touching the foundations of the Christian religion, 
e. g. 9 the creation of all things by God at the beginning of time, the 
special creation of man, the formation of the first woman from the 
first man, the unity of the human race" ! (Papal Biblical Commission, 
June 30, 1909 ; CE. vii, 313). Thus : No Adam and Eve, no Garden of 
Eden and Talking Snake, no "Fall" and Curse therefore : No Saviour 
Jesus Christ, no Plan of Salvation, no truth in the Christian Religion ! 
The fatal point is elucidated with inexorable logic and dogmatic truth 
by the "Reformed" ex-Father Peter Martyr: "So important is it to 
comprehend the work of creation that we see the creed of the Church 
take this asi its starting point. Were this Article taken away, there 


would be no original sin ; the promise of Christ would become void, and 
all the vital force of our religion would be destroyed" 1 Father Luther 
inherited the same faith and bequeathed it to his dissident following: 
"Moses spoke properly and plainly, and neither allegorically nor 
figuratively ; and therefore the world with all creatures was created 
in six days." Calvin, in his "Commentary on Genesis," argues that the 
Genesis account of Creation is literally true, and warns those who 
dare to believe otherwise, and thus "basely insult the Creator, to 
expect a Judge who will annihilate them." Again he says : "We know 
on the authority of Moses, that longer ago than 6000 years the world 
did not exist." So too, the Westminster Confession of Faith, in full 
Protestant force and effect today specially lays it down as "nec- 
essary to salvation to believe that all things visible and invisible were 
created not only out of nothing but exactly in six days." And the 
Churches have murdered countless thousands to impress this beautiful 
impossible truth. 

Notwithstanding the crushing disproofs of those primitive forged 
"Fables of Moses," by every fact of astronomy, geology, anthro- 
pology, biology, and kindred sciences, known to schoolboys today, 
Faith clings fatuously to its fetiches: Arkansas ("Now laugh!"), 
Mississippi, Tennessee, three States of the Twentieth Century United 
States, have made it crime by Law to teach the sciences which dis- 
credit the Genesis Myths, upon which Christian Superstition utterly 
depends ; and like medieval laws are sought to be imposed in all our 
States. The True Church, like all the others, still founds its "Faith 
and Morals" upon these old Hebrew forgeries of Genesis- and peddles 
them to its Faithful ; but it knows better. Thus the whole True Faith 
is shipwrecked by these heretical confessions of CE. 9 forced from it 
by the truths of heretical Modernism, in full face of the fierce inspired 
fulminations of the Syllabus of Errors : "In an article on Bible chro- 
nology it is hardly necessary in these days to discuss the date of the 
Creation. At least two hundred dates have been suggested, varying 
from 3483 to 6934 years B. c., all based on the supposition that the 
Bible enables us to settle tfye point. But it does nothing of the kind. 
. . . The literal interpretation has now been entirely abandoned ; and 
the world is admitted to be of immense antiquity"! (CE. iii, 731.) 
Again the "sacred science" of Genesis and of Christianity is further 



admitted to be false, and the fabulous "Septuagint" Bible on which 
Christianity was founded before the era of the second century for- 
geries of Gospels and Epistles, to be a holy fraud, in these further ex- 
cerpts accrediting the true revelations of modern Science as against 
those of Moses : 

"The church . . . does not attach decisive influence to the chro- 
nology of the Vulgate, the official version of the Western Church, since 
in the Martyrology for Christmas day, the creation of Adam is put 
down in the year 5199 B. c., which is the reading of the Septuagint. It 
is, however, certain that we cannot confine the years of man's sojourn 
on earth to that usually set down. . . . Various explanations have 
been given of chapter v (Genesis) to explain the short time it seems 
to allow between the Creation and the Flood. . .* . The total number 
of years in the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Septuagint differs, in the 
Hebrew it being 1656, in the Samaritan 1307, and in the Septuagint 
2242. . . . According to Science the length of this period was much 
greater than appears from the genealogical table. ... In any case, 
whether we follow the traditional or critical view, the numbers ob- 
tained from the genealogy of the Patriarchs in chapter xi must be 
greatly augmented, in order to allow time for such a development of 
civilization, language, and race type as had been reached by the time 
of Abraham." (CE. iii, 731-3.) 


We have noted the capital forgery wrought by the Church in con- 
sciously and unconscionably adopting and perpetuating the false 
translation in the Septuagint, of the "virgin shall conceive" pretended 
prophecy of Isaiah vii, 14. Indisputably the whole forged fabric of 
supernatural Christianity is based on, and depends upon, this one 
monumental forgery falsely used to give credit to the Christian for- 
gery of "the Gospel according to Matthew" as to the Divine and 
miraculous "Virgin birth of Jesus Christ.*' Out of scores of other 
notoriously falsified translations of the sacred Old Testament texts, 
attention is here called only to several of the most signal ones which 
vitally affect and destroy the validity of the most essential preten- 
sions of truth of the Christian religion. These frauds of translation 
and others, have been thoroughly examined and supported by nu- 


merous texts from the original Hebrew, and falsified verses of the Eng- 
lish versions, in my 7s It God's Word?, to which references must be 
made for a more complete treatment than is here pertinent. Those now- 
cited in summary are all of them deliberate falsifications and forgeries 
in translation which go to the vitals of the Hebrao-Christian system 
of holy imposture. 

If the Hebrew originals had been truthfully translated, we should 
have no such false pretenses for faith as the Hebrew One God anciently 
revealed to Adam, and to Moses, no Adam, no man "but little lower 
than the angels" because of his immortal soul, no unique "revelation" 
of the "Ineff able Name" Jehovah to Moses ; all that we would have, 
all that the Hebrew texts reveal is a primitive polytheistic idolatry 
of the crudest and most superstitious order. Let us see. 

(a) The "God" Forgery 

The first sentence of the translated Bibles is a falsification and 
forgery of the highest importance. We read with awed solemnity of 
faith : "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Gen. 
i, 1). The Hebrew word for God is el; the plural is elohim, gods. The 
Hebrew text of Genesis i, 1, reads : "Bereshith bar a elohim," etc., 
"In-beginning created gods the-heavens and-the-earth." And, in the 
same chapter we read in Hebrew honestly translated, thirty times 
the word "elohim," gods, to whom are attributed all the works of 
creation in the six peculiar "days" of Genesis, This is plainly evi- 
dent from the Hebrew texts of Genesis i, which even false intention 
could not hide in the translation, "And-said elohim (gods), Let-US- 
make man (adam) in-image-OUR 9 after-likeness-07jB" (i, 26). And 
when "adam" had eaten of the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge, 
"the Lord God" said, "Behold, the-man has become like one of US, to 
know good and evil" (iii, 27). And when the Tower of Babel was 
abuilding, "The Lord [Heb. Yahveh] said . . . Come, let US go 
down," etc. And thus, some 2570 times the plural, elohim, gods, is used 
in the Hebrew texts, but is always falsely translated "God" in the false 
singular, when speaking of the Hebrew deity, Yahveh. 

In the three Genesis verses above quoted, we have three different 
designations of the Hebrew deity or deities: elohim, gods, falsely 
translated "God" ; "Lord God" (Heb. Yahveh-elohim) ; and "Lord" 


(Heb. Yahveh). Yahveh is the proper name of the Hebrew God, in 
English rendered Jehovah: Y ahoeh-elohim is a Hebrew "construct- 
f orm" honestly meaning "Yahveh-of-the-gods." Invariably (with rare 
exceptions to be noted), these personal names are falsely rendered 
"Lord" and "Lord God," respectively, for purposes of pious fraud 
which we shall now expose to the shame of a theology of imposture. We 
will return to this after noting a pair of others. 

(6) The "Adam" Forgery 

There was no first man "Adam," according to the Hebrew texts of 
the story. The word adam in Hebrew is a common noun, meaning man 
in a generic sense; in Genesis i, 26, we have read: "And elohim (gods) 
said, Let us make adam (man)"; and so "elohim created ha-adam 
(the-man) ; . . . male and female created he them" (i. 27). And in the 
second story, where man is first made alone : "Yahveh formed ha-adam 
(the-man) out of the dust of ha-adamah the ground" (ii, 7). Man is 
called in Hebrew adam because formed out of adamah 9 the ground ; 
just as in Latin man is called homo because formed from humus, the 
ground, homo ex humo, in the epigram of Father Lactantius. (Lact., 
Divine Institutes, ii, 58; ANF. vii, 58.) The forging of the common 
noun adam into a mythical proper name Adam, was a post-exilic 
fraud in the forging of fictitious genealogies from "in the beginning" 
to Father Abraham. 

(c) The "Soul" Forgery 

In Genesis i is the account of the creation of elohim gods on the 
fifth day, of "nephesh hayyah the moving creature that hath life, 95 
and of "nephesh hayyah every living creature" out of the waters 
(i, 20, 21) ; and on the sixth day of "nephesh hayyah the living 
creature" out of the ground (i, 24) ; and he gave to ha-adam the-man, 
dominion over "kol nephesh hayyah everything wherein there is 
life." (i, 30.) So reads the Hebrew text all these dumb animal living 
creatures are by God called "nephesh hayyah, 99 literally "living 
soul," as will be found stuck into the margins of the Authorized Ver- 
sion. In chapter ii we have the history of ha-adam made from ha- 
adamah; and, in wonderful contrast to these lowly "living creatures" 


(nephesh hayyah) 9 Yahveh-elohim "breathed into his nostrils nish- 
math hayyim (living breaths), and ha-adam became nephesh 
hay yah a living soul" ! (ii, 7.) In Hebrew nephesh everywhere and 
simply means soid, and hayyah (living) is the feminine singular ad- 
jective from hai, life. Man, therefore, was created exactly the same as 
the other animals ; all had or were nephesh hayyah living souls, in- 
distinctly. The "false pen of the scribes, 5 ' who in translation made 
the dumb animals merely Ivomg creatures, and "Creation's micro- 
cosmical masterpiece, Man," a "living soul," falsely altered these plain 
words so as to deceive into a belief of a special God-breathed soul in 
man, far different from the brute animal that perisheth. 

(d) The "Mosaic Revelation" Forgery 

When Yahveh appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush, and an- 
nounced himself as "the God of thy fathers," he was a total stranger 
to Moses ; Moses did not at all know him, had never heard of him ; so 
that he asked, "What is thy name?" so that he could report it to the 
people back home in Egypt, who had never heard it. After some inter- 
mission, the God came directly to the point, and declared I quote 
the exact words one of the most notorious falsities in Holy Writ : 

"And elohim spake unto Moses, and said unto him, anoJci Yahveh I am 
the Lord! 

"And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and tmto Jacob, by the 
name of el-shaddai, but by my name Yahveh (JEHOVAH) was I not known 
to them." (Ex. vi, 2, 3.) 

Here we have the positive averment of the Hebrew God himself to 
the effect that here, for the first time since the world began, is "re- 
vealed" to mankind the "ineffable name" of Yahveh, here first appear- 
ing in the Bible translations, and there printed .as JEHOVAH in 
capital letters for more vivid and awe-inspiring impression. But this 
is a capital Lie of the Lord, or of his biographer who imputed it to him* 
In verse 4 of Genesis ii, the name YAHVEH first appears ; "in the day 
that Yahveh-elohim made the earth and the heavens." Its first recorded 
use in the mouth of a mythical personage, was when Mother Eve 
"conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from Yahveh 



the Lord.' 5 (Gen. iv, 1.) One hundred and fifty-six times the personal 
name YAHVEH occurs in the Book of Genesis alone ; and scores of 
these times in the mouths of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, as any 
one may read in Genesis, with the assurance that every single time 
that the title "the Lord" and "the Lord God" appears, it is a false 
translation by the priests for the Hebrew personal name YAHVEH. 
Throughout the Hebrew "Scriptures" the Divine Name thousands of 
times occurs : "The sacred name occurs in Genesis about 156 times ; 
... in round numbers it is found in the Old Testament 6000 times, 
either alone or in conjunction with another Divine name." (CE. viii, 
329, 331.) More exactly, 'What is called the Tetragrammaton, 
YHVH, appears in the Old Testament 6823 times as the proper name 
of God as the God of Israel. As such it serves to distinguish him from 
the gods of the other nations." (EB. iii, 3320.) Thus was the Hebrew 
tribal god YAHVEH distinguished from Bel, and Chemosh, and 
Dagon, and Shamash, and the scores of "gods of the nations"; just 
as Bill distinguishes its bearer from Tom, Dick, and Harry. This was 
precisely the Hebrew usage to distinguish one heathen god from 
another. And this the false translators sought to hide, giving names 
to all the "other gods," but suppressing a name for the Hebrew deity, 
who as "the Lord," or "the Lord God," was high and unique, "a god 
above all gods," the one and only true God. 

But yet more malicious and evil-intentioned of deception: 6823 
times is the name of the Hebrew God concealed by false rendition for 
the deliberate purpose of forging the whole Hebrew Bible, as trans- 
lated, into semblance of harmony with the false avowal of Exodus vi, 
3, that "by my name YAHVEH was I not know unto them." Search 
as one may, outside Exodus vi, 3, the god-name YAHVEH (Jehovah) 
is never to be found in the translations in a single instance, except in 
Psalm Ixxxiii, 18, and Isaiah xii, 2 and xxvi, 4. The false translations 
thus "make truth to be a liar," the lie of Exodus vi, 3 to seem the 
truth ; and a barbarous heathen tribal god among a hundred neigh- 
bor and competitive gods to be the nameless One Lord God of the 
Universe. The Hebrew-Christian One God is a patent Forgery and 
Myth; a mythological Father-god can have no "only begotten Son" ; 
Jesus Christ is & mythus even before he is mythically born in the 


fancies of the Church Fathers, as we shall soon have ample evidence to 

With respect to the mythical Hebrew-Christian God or gods, we 
may safely say, as says Father Justin Martyr apropos of the other 
mythic Pagan gods : "And we confess that we are atheists, so far as 
gods of this sort are concerned." (First Apology, ch. vi ; ANF. i, 169.) 


We may pause a moment to catch a valuable view which will be of 
great aid to understanding the mental processes of the ancient writers 
in their portrayal of events, real or fanciful, which they set about to 
record as history." These pioneers of historical literature lived in 
an age of simple-minded credulity, and everything which they saw 
recorded or heard related, however extravagant and seemingly in- 
credible or impossible, passed all as perfectly good history in their 
receptive and uncritical minds. Speaking of the legendary, the tradi- 
tional, the supernatural stories, myths, folk-lore and fables, "in 
short, everything which seemed to testify to the past," which formed 
the raw material of the early historians, the Encyclopedia Biblica 
gives a graphic picture of primitive history-writing, not only Hebraic 
but Gentilic : 

"Their sources, like those of the Greek logographers with whom it 
is natural to compare them, were poems, genealogies, often represent- 
ing clan-groupings, tribal and local traditions of diverse kinds, such 
as furnish the materials for most of the Book of Judges ; the historical 
traditions of sanctuaries ; the sacred legends of holy places, relating 
theophanies and other revelations, the erection of the altar or sacred 
stone, the origin of popular usages e. g. Bethel ; laws ; myths of 
foreign or native origin ; folk-lore and fable, in short, everything 
which seemed to testify of the past. 

"To us the greater part of this material is not in any proper sense 
historical at all ; but for the early Israelite as for the early Greek his- 
torian it was otherwise ; our distinctions between authentic history, 
legendary history, pure legend, and myth, he made as little as he 
recognized our distinction of natural and supernatural. It was all 



history to him ; and if one part of it had a better attestation than 
another, it was certainly the sacred history as it was told at the an- 
cient sanctuaries of the land. 

"The early Hebrew historians did not affix their names to their 
works ; they had, indeed, no idea of authorship. The traditions and 
legends which they collected were common property, and did not cease 
to be so when they were committed to writing ; the written book was 
in every sense the property of the scribe or the possessor of the roll. 
Only a part of the great volume of tradition was included in the first 
books. Transcribers freely added new matter from the same sources on 
which the original authors had drawn, the traditions of their own 
locality or sanctuary, variants of historical traditions or legend. 
Every new copy was thus in some measure a fresh rescension. . . * 
Scribes compared different copies, and combined their contents ac- 
cording to their own judgment or interests. ... Of records or 
monuments there are but a few traces, and these for the most part 
doubtful." (EB. ii, 2075-76.) 

To say nothing now of the Old or New Testament "canonical" and 
"apocryphal" literature, countless examples of this imaginative 
method of history-writing abound in all the ancient writers, as all who 
are familiar with such classics as Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, 
Josephus, Livy, will readily recall. One of the most inveterate forms of 
imaginative creation on the part of the old historiographers was the 
invention of sayings and whole speeches which, just as do the fiction- 
writers of today, they put entire into the mouths of the personages of 
whom they were writing, which discourses they not only invented whole, 
but always wrought them in the style and manner of the writer and 
his epoch, and not in those of their ancient subjects. All are familiar 
with such instances in Homer, Dante, Shakespeare and Milton, and 
which we all know are pure inventions of those writers. Naming several 
of the ancient historians above mentioned, and others, a distinguished 
philosopher of history thus describes the art : 

"Such speeches as we find in Thucydides (for example), of which we 
can positively assert that they are not bona-fide records. . Thus Livy 
puts into the mouths of the old Roman Kings, Consuls, and generals, such 
orations as would be delivered by an accomplished advocate of the Livian 
era. ... In the same way he gives us descriptions of battles, as if he had 


been an actual spectator; but whose features would serve well enough for 
battles in any period." (Hegel, The Philosophy of History, p. 2.) 

Speaking of much later times, and of a different class, but like 
type, of writers, Hegel again says : "In the Middle Ages, if we ex- 
cept the Bishops, who were placed in the very centre of the political 
world, the Monks monopolized this category as naive chroniclers." 
(76. p. 3.) 

As typical illustration of the principles and practices above de- 
scribed of the best of the ancient writers, but more especially as an 
example of the kind of "history" written by the most learned and illus- 
trious historian of Jewry, fellow-countryman and contemporary of the 
supposed Apostolic writers of the New Testament books, it is of the 
highest significance to cite some of the solemn historical recordations 
of Josephus, from two of his most famous works ; they will make more 
appreciated at their real value some of the inspired historical recitals 
of contemporaneous sacred history. 

In his Antiquities of the Jews Josephus follows closely the subject 
matter and order of narration of the early Old Testament books, be- 
ginning with the Creation, giving the full substance of those histories, 
and adding quaint comments all his own and expansions and embellish- 
ments unknown to or unrecorded by Moses. In Eden, not only the 
Talking Snake could speak, but all the now dumb animals : "All living 
creatures had one language, at that time" (I, i, 4). After our parents 
had eaten of the Fruit of Knowledge anS, discovering themselves 
naked, hid themselves from the Creator, "This behaviour surprised 
God," who delivers a lengthy speech of reproval not recorded by Moses 
(Ib. ) ; and such orations are plentiful and detailed between God and 
all the other notables who came into personal contact with him ; a gem 
is his oration to Noah. He relates the wars waged by the wicked 
posterity of Cain, to the great distress of Adam, who predicted the 
two-fold destruction of the earth, once by water and again by fire. 
As the Sethites were good people and intelligent, and had made great 
discoveries in astronomy, which they wished preserved for such pos- 
terity as might survive the yet future Flood, "they made two pillars, 
the one of brick, the other of stone ; they inscribed their discoveries on 
them both, that in case the pillar of brick should be destroyed by the 



Flood, the pillar of stone might remain, and exhibit these discoveries to 
mankind; and also inform them that there was another pillar of brick 
erected by them. Now this remains in the land of Siriad to this day." 
(76., I, ii, 2. ) He relates with naive and realistic garnishment the tale 
of Sodom, and Lot and his daughters, and of Lot's wife turned to a 
pillar of salt, which is Gospel truth, "for I have seen it, and it remains 
at this day" ! (Ib. I, xi, 4.) These historical drolleries might be quoted 
ad infinitum from Jewry's greatest historian. 

The name of Solomon was most potent conjure in the Orient 
through all the succeeding centuries ; the spells and charms, amulets 
and fetiches inscribed with his mystic symbol and pronounced in his 
name, were the terror of all the devils who so populated the Jewish 
mind, and the Christian. A noted instance of the potency of this Name, 
exhibited before the Roman Emperor Vespasian and his court and 
army, and witnessed by Josephus himself, so circumstantial, so faith- 
compelling, so artless and childishly fabling, that I am constrained to 
quote it for the light it sheds on the "historical" methods of the "age of 
apocryphal literature" : 

"God also enabled him [Solomon] to learn that skill which expels de- 
mons, which is a science useful and sanative to men. He composed such in- 
cantations also by which distempers are alleviated. And he left behind 
ihim the manner of using exorcisms, by which they drive away demons, so 
that they never return, and this method of cure is of great force unto this 
day; for I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was 
Eleazar, relieving people that were demoniacs in the presence of Vespasian, 
and his sons, and his captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers. The 
manner of the cure was this : he put a ring, that had a root of one of the 
sorts mentioned by Solomon, to the nostrils of the demoniac, after which 
he drew out the demon through his nostrils ; and when the man fell down 
immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more, making still men- 
tion of Solomon, and reciting the incantation which he composed. And 
when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he 
had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or basin full of water, and 
commanded the demon, as -he went out of the man, to overturn it, and 
thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man; and when this 
was done, the skill and wisdom of Solomon was shown very manifestly; 
for which reason it is, that all men may know the vastness of Solomon's 
abilities, and how he was beloved of God, and that the extraordinary vir- 
tues of every kind with which this king was endowed, may not be unknown 


to any people under the sun ; for this reason, I say, it is that we have pro- 
ceeded to speak so largely of these matters." ( Josephus, Antiq, Jews, Bk. 
VIII, Ch. ii, 5; Whitson's trans.) 

This is followed by the full text of the autograph letters between 
Solomon and Hiram regarding the building of the Temple. 

Whether the same kind of root of Solomon's magical powers just 
above used by Eleazar, or one of another species of like power, it was 
very difficult to obtain and the quest was attended with many dangers, 
which of course enhanced the value and potency of its magic ; but 
here is Josephus's solemn description of the plant and account of the 
eerie and risky manner of securing this treasure, known locally as 
Baaras root : 

"Its colour is like that of flame, and toward evening it sends out a cer- 
tain ray like lightning: it is not easily taken by such as would do it, but 
recedes from their hands, nor will yield itself to be taken quietly, until either 
the urine of a woman, or blood, be poured upon it; nay, even then it is 
certain death to those that touch it, unless anyone take and hang the root 
itself down from his hand, and so carry it away. It may also be taken 
another way, without danger, which is this : they dig a trench quite round 
about it, till the hidden part of the root be very small, then they tie a dog 
to it, and, when the dog tries hard to follow him that tied him, this root 
is easily plucked up, but the dog dies immediately, as if it were instead of 
the man that would take the plant away; nor after this need anyone be 
afraid of taking it into their hands. Yet, after all this pains in getting, it 
is only valuable on account of one virtue it hath, that if it be only brought 
to sick persons, it quickly drives away those called demons, which are no 
other than the spirits of the wicked, that enter into any men that are alive 
and kill them, unless they can obtain some help against them/* (Josephus, 
Wars of the Jews, Book VII, Chap, iv, 3.) 

Instead of artful mendacity, some readers, in view of this, may 
charitably impute artless simplicity of wit to some of the devil- 
exorcising fable-mongers of the New Testament, the pious Fathers 
who forged its Books. 

If such examples are abounding in the most brilliant of Jewish his- 
torians, distinguished for nobility of lineage, for statesmanship and 
for literary ability, what may be expected from the admittedly 
"ignorant and unlearned men'* such as traditionally wrote those 
Gospels and Epistles 'of the Christians? We may now appreciate the 



full significance of the admission of the Catholic Encyclopedia, speak- 
ing of the Church Fathers and writers through all the Ages of Faith 
"bef ore the eighteenth century," of whom it says : 

"The early ecclesiastical writers were unconscious of nearly all the 
problems to which criticism has given rise. . . . Looking at the Divine side, 
they deemed as of trifling account questions of authorship, date, composi- 
tion, accepting unreservedly for these points such traditions as the Jewish 
Church had handed down. . . . The Fathers saw in every sentence of the 
Scripture a pregnant oracle of God. Apparent contradictions and other 
difficulties were solved without taking possible human imperfections into 
view. Except in regard to the preservation of the sacred text there was noth- 
ing to elicit a critical view of the Bible in the age of the Fathers, and this 
applies also to the Scholastic period." (CE. iv, 492.) 


Christians no doubt believe in simple faith that the wonderful in- 
spired truths of their New Testament were original pronouncements 
of Jesus Christ or directly revealed by him to his holy Apostles, who 
in turn revealed them to the populace for the first time as the "good 
news" of the new religion for the salvation of sinful man. Even a brief 
glance at a few of the most notable of the Jewish forgeries of the "age 
of apochryphal literature" will dispel that pious belief, and show 
the most characteristic and essential doctrines and dogmas of Chris- 
tianity to be but refurbished vagaries of the fanciful and fabulous 
speculations of already existing Jewish apocryphal writings of the 
times just preceding and within the new Christian era. These writings 
were put forth falsely as the utterances of long since dead or wholly 
legendary Old Testament notables, and were neither inspired nor re- 
vealed heavenly truth, but simply vain and forged speculations of their 
fantastic writers. We shall see the cardinal tenets of "revealed" Chris- 
tianity in a glance at a few of these Jewish pseudographs, and let the 
Christian apologist explain. 

"This literature is of the highest value today because of the light it 
throws on the growth of eschatological and Messianic doctrines among the 
Jewish people just previous to the rise of Christianity, especially since 
these doctrines have, in a purified form, found a permanent place in the 
Christian system." (New Int. Encyc. i, 745.) 

The Book of Enoch, forged in the name of the grandson of Adam, 
is the fragmentary remains of a whole literature which circulated 
under the pretended authorship of that mythical Patriarch. In its 
present form, the work, of 104 chapters, is composed of five Books, 
with the following titles, of which those of Books 3 and 4 are of par- 
ticular significance, namely : 1. The Rape of Women by Fallen Angels, 
and the Giants that were Begotten of Them; 2. The Visions of Enoch 
begun ; 3. The Visions continued, with Views of the Messiah's King- 
dom ; 4. Man's Destiny revealed in Dreams from the Beginning to the 
End of the Messianic Kingdom ; 5. The Warnings of Enoch to his own 
Family and to Mankind. This work is a composite of at least five 
unknown Jewish writers, and was composed during the last two cen- 
turies B. c. The forged Book of Enoch is quoted as genuine and in- 
spired in the Christian Epistle of Jude (14, et seq.) 9 and as "Scrip- 
ture" in the near-canonical Epistle of Barnabas; with the early 
Church Fathers and Apologists, among whom Justin Martyr, Iren- 
aeus, Athenagoras, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Anatolius, Ori- 
gen, St. Augustine, etc., "it had all the weight of a canonical book," 
but was finally condemned as a forgery by the forged Apostolic Consti- 
tutions, an instance of the very dubious divine guidance of the in- 
spired Church against all error. Father Tertullian devotes an entire 
chapter "Concerning the Genuineness of the Prophecy of Enoch," in 
which he gives fantastic patristic reasons as to how the Book survived 
Noah's Flood, either by the providence of Noah himself or by the Prov- 
idence of God as in the mythical case of Esdras. In answer to the 
scoffing objections that the Jews rejected the Book, "I suppose, 5 * he 
seriously argues, "that they do not think that, having been published 
before the Deluge, it could have safely survived that world-wide calam- 
ity, the abolisher of all things." But, he urges, "let them recall to their 
memory that Noah, the survivor of the deluge, was* the great-grand-son 
of Enoch himself," and that Noah probably preserved it at the behest 
of Methuselah. But, again, "If Noah had not preserved it in this way, 
there would still be this consideration to warrant our assertion of the 
genuineness of this Scripture: he could equally 'have renewed it, under 
the Spirit's inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of 
the Deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian 
stprming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally 



agreed to have been restored through Ezra."' But the good Father had 
other and equally cogent clerical reasons for accepting the Book as 
inspired Scripture: "But since Enoch in the same Scripture has 
preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected 
by us which pertains to us ; and we read that 'every Scripture suitable 
for edification is divinely inspired.* ... To these considerations is 
added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle 
Jude." (On the Apparel of Women, II, ii; ANF. iv, 15-16.) By this 
excerpt from the pious Father may be judged the value of the "testi- 
mony" of Apostles and Church Fathers as to the inspiration, truth 
and authenticity of holy "Scriptures," which is nil. 

Of the immense significance of these forged Jewish "sacred writ- 
ings" in general upon Christian "revelation," and of the fabulous 
Book of Enoch in particular, with its elaborated myth of the Messiah, 
CE. thus confesses : " Jewish Apocalyptic is an attempt to supply the 
place of prophecy, which had been dead for centuries, and has its 
roots in the sacred oracles of Israel. . . . Naturally basing itself 
upon the Pentateuch and the Prophets, it clothed itself fictitiously 
with the authority of a patriarch or prophet who was made to reveal 
the transcendent future. . . . Messianism of course plays an im- 
portant part in apocalyptic eschatology, and the idea of the Messias 
in certain books received a very high development. . . . The parables 
of Henoch, with their pre-exist ent Messias, mark the highest point of 
development (hence not Divine Revelation) of the Messianic con- 
cept to be found in the whole range of Hebrew literature." (CE. i, 
601, 602.) From these uninspired ravings of Jewish forgers came thus 
the "divine revelation'* of the co-eternal "Son of God" worked up in- 
stead of the old "revealed" 1 human King "of the seed of David." 

The forged Book of Enoch, thus vouched for, is notable for being 
"the earliest appearance of the Messiah in non-canonical literature." 
It is of the greatest importance for its doctrine of the Jewish Messiah, 
who here appears as wholly an earthly human deliverer and King over 
Israel forever, and for the origin of the exalted titles applied to the 
Messiah in the New Testament Books, as well as of a number of sup- 
posedly distinctive Christian doctrines, first "revealed" by Jesus the 
Christ. In this Book we first find the lofty titles: "Christ" or "the 
Anointed One," "Son of Man," "the Righteous One," "the Elect One," 


all of which were boldly plagiarized by the later Christians and 
bestowed on Jesus of Nazareth. The Messiah, just as in the New 
Testament of later times, exists from the beginning (48, 2) ; he sits 
on the throne of God (45, 3) ; and all judgment is committed unto him 
(69, 27). The acceptance of Enoch as a Messianic prophet by the 
Christians led to his rejection by the Jews. Here is the earliest in- 
vention of the Christian Hell of fire and brimstone for eternal torture : 
"The wicked shall go down inta the Sheol of darkness and fire and dwell 
there forever" ; this being "one of the earliest mentions of Sheol as a 
hell of torment" (CE. i, 602-3 ; EB. i, 223-5). It is the oldest piece of 
Jewish literature which teaches the general resurrection of Israel, a 
doctrine expanded to include Gentiles in later "interpolations" into 
New Testament books. It abounds in such "Christian" doctrines as the 
Messianic Kingdom, Hell, the Resurrection, and Demonology, the 
Seven Heavens, and the Millennium, all of which have here their 
apocryphal Jewish promulgation, after being plagiarized bodily 
from the Persian and Babylonian myths and superstitions, as we 
have seen confessed. There are numerous quotations, phrases, 
clauses, or thoughts derived from Enoch, or of closest kin with it, in 
several of the New Testament Gospels and Epistles, which may be 
readily found and compared as catalogued in the authorities below 
cited ; Pagan- Jewish myths and doctrines which shared in moulding 
the analogous New Testament "revelations" or formed the necessary 
link in the development of doctrines from the Old to the New Testa- 
ment. The CE. says of the Book of Enoch : 

"It has left its imprint on the New Testament and the works of the 
early Fathers. . . . Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, and even 
St. Augustine suppose the work to be a genuine one of the patriarch. . . . 
The work is a compilation, and its component parts were written in Pales- 
tine by Jews of the orthodox school ... in the latter part of the second 
century before Christ. (See CE. i, 602, passim; EB. v, 220-224.) 

In Fourth Esdras, as in the Apocalypse of Baruch, we find for the 
first time, the fatal phrase and doctrine, "all mankind sinned with 
Adam" (CE. i, 604), whence Paul forged his fearful and accursed 
dogma of original sin and eternal damnation. Fourth Maccabees, er- 
roneously ascribed by Eusebius and others to Josephus, dates from 



about 4 B. c., just after the death of Herod. It is strongly indoctri- 
nated with the Stoic philosophy, from which the author "derived his 
four cardinal virtues, Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, Temperance; 
and it was through Fourth Maccabees that this category was ap- 
propriated by early Christian ascetical writers" (CE. i, 605-6), and 
later "canonized" by the Church, (CE. xi, 391.) 

The Assumption of Moses was forged in the name of that Worthy 
as its genuine author, about the beginning of or early in the Christian 
era, with the ostensible purpose of confirming the Mosaic Laws in 
Deuteronomy. It gives the parting communications of Moses to his 
successor, Joshua, and unfolds, in a series of pretended predictions, 
delivered in written form, the course of Israel's history down to 
Herod's time. Here is found the legend of the dispute between Michael 
Archangel and Satan over the body of Moses, which the Christian 
Epistle of Jude (v. 9) cites as God-inspired truth. (CE. i, 602-3.) 
The Book of Jubilees, or little Genesis, is a fabricated embellishment 
of the Old Testament Genesis, written in the name of Moses somewhere 
between 135 B. c. and 105 B. c., or 60 A. D., and purports to be a revela- 
tion made to Moses by the 'Angel of the Face' of events from Adam 
to Moses' own day; the Patriarchs are made the exponents of the 
writer's own Pharisaic views and hopes. It is quoted as good "Scrip- 
ture" by Greek and Latin Fathers down to the twelfth century, when 
its forged character was disclosed. 

One of the most important of apocryphal apocalyptic forgeries is 
the Apocalypse of Baruch, "a pseudograph with evident Christian in- 
terpolations" (CE. i, 604), written by a Jewish Pharisee about 50-90 
A. D., who speaks in the first person in the name of Baruch, secretary 
of the Prophet Jeremiah. The book begins by declaring that the word 
of the Lord came to him in the %5th year of King Jeconiah, who 
reigned only three months, and was carried away captive to Babylon 
eleven years before the fall of Jerusalem, 586 B. c., which event the 
forgery bewails ; it is filled with the Messianic hopes of Jewry at the 
time of the later fall of Jerusalem in 70 A. D. The book furnishes a 
setting and background of many distinctive New Testament doctrines 
and problems, treating of Original Sin, which it traces to the sin of 
Adam, Forgiveness, Works, Justification, Free Will, etc., and thus 
enables us to estimate the contributions made in this respect by Jewish 


forgeries to inspired Christian thought as developed in the so-called 
Pauline Epistles, which Paul never wrote. Some notable Fathers, 
such as Athenagoras, St. Justin Martyr, and St. Irenaeus, cite Baruch 
as a Prophet, and vouch for him as on the same footing as Jeremiah, 
just as Irenasus vouches for Susanna and Bel and the Dragon as the 
inspired work of Daniel. (CE. i, 6.04 ; iii, 271; EB. i, 220.) 

Father Justin, in several chapters, accuses the Jews of having 
"removed from Esdras and Jeremiah passages clearly mentioning the 
Saviour," as also from Psalms ; he says : "they have altogether taken 
away many Scriptures from the translation effected by those Seventy 
elders who were with Ptolemy, and by which this very man who was 
crucified is proved to have been set forth expressly as God, and man, 
and as having been crucified, and as dying." (Dial. Trypho, chs. Ixxi- 
Ixxiv; ANF. i, 234235.) But these passages, says Middleton, were 
never in the Hebrew Scriptures ; "they were not erased by the Jews, 
but added [to their copies] by the Christians, or forged by Justin." 
(Op. cit., pp. 41, 42.) 

To what extent these pious Jewish forgeries formed the background 
and basis of the Christian doctrines and dogmas of pretended direct 
"revelation," and informed the thought and utterance of Jesus Christ 
the raw material and working tools of the Christian propagandist, 
may be realized from this explicit acknowledgement : 

"The most important and valuable of the extant Jewish apocrypha are 
those which contain the visions and revelations of the unseen* world and 
the Messianic future. Jewish apocryphal literature is a theme which de- 
serves the attention of all interested in the development of the religion 
of Israel, that body of concepts and tendencies in which are fixed the 
roots of the great doctrinal principles of Christianity itself, just as its 
Divine Founder took his temporal generation from the stock of orthodox 

"The Jewish apocryphas furnish the completing links in the progress 
of Jewish theology and fill what would otherwise be a gap, though a small 
one, between the advanced stage marked by the deutero-canonical [L e. 
long doubted but finally accepted] books and its full maturity so rela- 
tively perfect that Jesus could suppose as existing in the popular conscious- 
ness, without teaching de novo, the doctrines of Future Retribution, the 
Resurrection of the body, and the existence, nature and office of angels." 
. i, 601.) 



Jl these divine and "revealed 5 * doctrines of Christian faith we have 
to be originally heathen Zoroastrian mythology, taken over first 
he Jews, then boldly plagiarized by the ex-Pagan Christians. Dean 
nan, of St. Paul's, thus describes the universality of these notions 
ng the heathens and the borrowing by the Jews and Christians 
rhat were originally Pagan superstitions now become articles 
Christian revelation: 

Satan, angels, immortality, resurrection all Persian and Zoroastrian 
rines imbibed by the Jews. . . . During the whole life of Christ, and 
sarly propagation of the religion, it must be borne in mind, that they 
place in an age, and among a people, which superstition had made so 
[liar with what were supposed to be preternatural events, that the 
iers awakened no emotion, or were speedily superceded by some new 
and on the e very-ready belief." (Milman, History of Christianity, I, 

Tius, again, the most precious Christian truths, of supposed divine 
r elation" through God, Christ and apostles were plagiarizations 
a forged Jewish pseudo-Scriptures, taken over into them from 
; contact with the Zoroastrian Persians. These myths and super- 
ons Jesus the Son of God found ready at hand "in the popular 
jciousness" of the ignorant wonder-craving Jewish peasantry; 
, Lo, our "revealed" Christian religion ! We may begin to suspect 
later "inspired" books of the "Apostles" as not beyond the taint 
*agan superstition and of the suspicion of Christian forgery. 



"Nothing stands in need of LYING but a LIE." 

To STTCH AN EXTENT are the origins of the Christian Religion 
wrapped in obscurity, due to the labyrinthine confusions and 
contradictions and forgeries of its early records, that it is quite 
impossible to extricate, with any degree of confidence, a thread of 
historic truth from the tangle. 

The 27 New Testament booklets, attributed to eight individual 
"Apostolic" writers, and culled from some 200 admitted forgeries 
called Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, constitute the present "canonical" 
or acceptedly inspired compendium of the primitive history of Chris- 
tianity. The only available method to extract from them approxi- 
mately just judgments as to the rise and progress of the new system 
of beliefs, must be by a series of tentative assumptions of relative 
truth of sundry details of the narratives. By relative truth of any 
tentatively assumed "fact, 5 * I mean such "fact" with relation always 
to its contradictory, one or the other must necessarily be false 
while both may be and probably are. For, as virtually every alleged 
"f act" recorded in Gospels, Acts and Epistles is off-set by a contra- 
dictory recital, rendering one or the other untrue, neither can be 
assumed with assurance ; the actuality of either, and of all, is thus 
made doubtful, and is subject to total rejection as our study of the 
booklets develops. 

On such provisional assumption that sundry of the things recorded 
possibly may have happened as in one manner or the other related, 
we are able to reach several obvious conclusions as to the order and 
approximate times of those dubiously-assumed happenings. In view, 
however, of what we have seen, and shall soon more abundantly see, of 



lifty and fraudulent methods of ecclesiastical "history"-writing 
>ropaganda, we may be prepared for some rude upsettings of 
iherited traditions of Christian fact and faith, 
e central character of the Christian faith, Jesus, to assume 
,s a historical personage, was a Jew, as were, by tradition, his 
des and entourage. As is, of course, well known: "Christianity 
ts rise in Judaism ; its Founder and His disciples were orthodox 
and the latter maintained their Jewish practices, at least for a 
after the day of Pentecost. The Jews themselves looked upon 
Jlowers of Christ as a mere Israelitish sect, . . . *the sect of 
azarenes 9 (Acts xxiv, 15)," the believers in the Promised Mes- 
(CE. iii, 713.) In this they were grievously deceived and disap- 
id, as, too, the world knows : "Christ's humble and obscure life, 
I in the ignominious death on the cross, was the very opposite of 
bhe Jews expected of their Christ." (CE. i, 620.) 
us was a native of Galilee, "his own country" (Mt. ii, 23 ; xiii, 
), or of Judasa, "his own country" (John iv, 4344). He was 
*in the days of Herod the King" (Mt. ii, 1), about 6 B. c., or 
Cyrenius was governor of Syria" (Luke ii, 17), about 7 A. D., 
le 13 years later. (CE. viii, 377 ; EB. i, 307-8.) The destructive 
idictions as to his lineage and parentage, and other essential 
:ulars, are reserved for opportune notice. Jesus became a Jewish 
ian religious teacher of the zealot reformer type; so zealous 
as own family thought him insane and sent out to apprehend 
Mark iii, 31) ; many of the people said of him, "He hath a devil, 
mad" (John x, 20) ; his own disciples, seeing his raid into the 
le after the money-changers, shook their heads and muttered 
overb: "The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up" (John 

ministry, of about one year, according to the first three Gospels, 
ie three years according to the fourth, was, by his own repeated 
ion, limited exclusively to his own Jewish people: "I am not 
at unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mt. xv, 24 ; cf. 
ii, 2526; xiii, 46; Rom. xv, 8) ; and he straitly enjoined on 
reive Apostles : "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into 
ty of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost 
of the house of Israel" (Mt. x, 56) ; to the -woman of Canaan 


who pleaded with him to have mercy on her daughter, "grievously 
vexed with a devil," he retorted: "It is not meet to take the children's 
bread, and cast it to dogs" (Mt. xv, 22-28; vii, 6). His own an- 
nouncement, and his command to the Twelve, was "Preach, saying, 
The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand" (Mt. x, 7), the exclusively 
Hebraic Kingdom of the Baptist (Mt. iii, 2), as of the Jewish Mes- 
sianic apocrypha which we have noticed. Jesus lived at the height of 
the "age of apocryphal literature," and in due time got into it, 

Before his death, time and again he made and repeated the assur- 
ance the most positive and iterated of all the sayings attributed to 
him of the Immediate end of the world and of his quick triumphant 
return to establish the Kingdom of God in the new earth and reign on 
the reestablished throne of David forever. Time and again he said 
and repeated : "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, 
which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming 
in his Kingdom" (Mt. xvi, 28 ; Mk. ix, 1 ; Lk. ix,*27) ; "this genera- 
tion shall not pass, till all these things be done" (Mk. xiii, 30). So 
quickly would this "second coming" be, that when the Twelve were 
sent out on their first preaching tour in little Palestine, their Master 
assured them : "Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the 
Son of man be come" (Mt. x, 23). Caiaphas, the high priest before 
whom Jesus was led after his capture in the Garden, solemnly con- 
jured him "By the living God" for the truth; and Jesus replied: 
"Nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man 
. . . coming in the clouds of heaven." (Mt. xxvi, 63, 64; Mk. xiv, 
61, 62.) Some people are expecting him yet. Of course, there were, 
could be, none but Jews in heaven, or in this new Kingdom of Heaven 
on the new earth: "Salvation is of the Jews." (John iv, 22.) It was 
144,000 Jews, the "sealed" saints, who alone constituted the original 
Jewish "Kingdom of God" (Rev. vii). 

With these explicit data we arrive at the first obvious and positive 
conclusion : With the expectation of a quick and sudden end of the 
world and of all things human, no books were written on the subject 
in that generation or, for a little leeway, the next or so, after the death 
of the expected returning King. The scant number of credulous Jews 
who accepted this preachment as "Gospel truth" and lived in this 



expectation, were nourished with neighborhood gossip and oral tradi- 
tions of the "good news," and needed and had no written books of 
inspired record of these things. Thus many years passed. Only as 
the dread consummation was delayed, and the hope deferred sickened 
the hearts of the expectant Jews and they waned in faith, and as ac- 
cused by Paul and Barnabas, "put it from you," did the defeated 
propagandists of the "Faith that failed at the Cross," give the shoul- 
der to the Jews and "turn to the Gentiles" (Acts xiii, 46), and begin to 
expand the failing new Jewish faith among the superstitious Pagans 
of the countries round about. But this was still by the spoken word ; 
on all the supposititious "missionary tours" the Word was spread 
by word of mouth ; written gospel books were not yet. When at last, 
the "coming" being still unrealized these books began to be written, 
we can accurately determine something of the order of their writing, 
and finally, though negatively, the approximate times when they were 
written, by ascertaining when they were not yet written. 

We have seen that for a century and more the only "Scriptures" 
used by the Jewish propagandists of the Christ were the Greek Sep- 
tuagint translations of the old Hebrew sacred writings, "the Law 
and the Prophets" (CE. v, 702; i, 635) ; supplemented by sundry 
Jewish apocrypha and the Pagan Sibylline Oracles ; these were the 
only "authorities" appealed to by the early "Fathers" for the prop- 
aganda of the new faith. Indubitably, if the wonderful "histories'* 
of their Christ and the inspired pretended writings of his first Apostles, 
forming now the New Testament, had then existed, even in scraps of 
writing, they would have been the most precious and potent docu- 
ments of propaganda, would have been snatched at and quoted and 
appealed to with infinite zeal and ardor, as they have been through 
the centuries since. But, for some 150 years, as we shall see, little or 
nothing besides Old Testament and Pagan Oracles were known or 
quoted. As said by the great critic, Salomon Reinach, **With the ex- 
ception of Papias, who speaks of a narrative by Mark, and a collection 
of sayings of Jesus, no Christian writer of the first half of the second 
century (L e., up to 150 A. D.) quotes the Gospels or their reputed 
authors." (Reinach, Orpheus, p. 218.) So, patently, as yet no "Gos- 
pels" and but few if any "Epistles" of our "canon" had as yet been 


Again, we read the 23 booklets from and including Acts to Rev- 
elation : there is not a solitary reference to, a word of quotation from, 
any of our four Gospels ; scarce a trace of the wonderful career and 
miracles of Jesus the Christ ; not a word of his "gospel" or teachings 
mentioned or quoted. These Epistles, indeed, "preach Christ crucified 5 * 
(from oral tradition), as the basis of the propagandists* own "gospel." 
But the written "Gospel of Jesus Christ' 5 (his life and words and 
deeds), was unknown : indeed, jealous of the so-called Petrine preach- 
ing which "perverts the gospel of Christ 5 ' as preached by him, the 
soi-disant Apostle Paul fulminates: "But though we, or an angel 
from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we 
have preached, let him be accursed" (Gal. i, 7, 8) ; so early did 
priestly intolerance and priestly curses on opponents come into holy 
vogue. Therefore the conclusion is inevitable, that when those 23 Acts 
and Epistles were written, none of the four "Gospel" biographies of 
Jesus the Christ had yet seen the light. "Written Gospels are neither 
mentioned nor implied in the NT epistles, nor in that of Clemens 
Romanus, nor, probably, in that of Barnabas, nor in the Didache. 
Luke (i, 1-4) implies that *many gospels' were current" (EB. ii, 
1809), at the time that Gospel was written. 

The Acts and Epistles, therefore, with Revelation, were written 
before any of the Gospel biographies. If these Christ-histories had 
existed, how eagerly would they have been seized upon to garnish and 
glorify the preachment of the early propagandists of the Faith that 
failed at the Cross, and would have perished wholly but for the all- 
believing Pagan Gentiles, who, when they heard it, "were glad, and 
glorified the word of the Lord" (Acts xiii, 48), as orally delivered. 


As the long years passed and one generation of disappointed 
"Messiah" Jews was gathered unto its fathers and was followed by 
another, the believers in the promised "second coming" for the estab- 
lishment of the Jewish Kingdom grew restless, and made pertinent 
complaint, " Saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since 
the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the be- 
ginning of the creation" (2 Peter ii, 4), and as they yet continue. 



Dubbing these reasonable but disturbing inquirers "scoffers," the 
crafty Peter tried in typical priestly form to squirm out of the em- 
barrassing situation created by the positive promises of the Christ 
and the inspired preachments of himself and his apostolic confreres, 
by the shifty rejoinder: "But, beloved ["scoffers"], be not ignorant 
of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, 
and a thousand years as one day" (2 Peter ii, 8) which doesn't 
mean anything for an honest answer; and time and again they cajole 
the impatient credulous: "Ye have need of patience; . . . for yet 
a little while, and he that shall come, will come." (Heb. x, 36, 37 ; cf . 
1 Thess. iv, 16-18 ; 2 Thess. iii, 5 ; James v, 7, 8 ; et passim.) But he 
isn't come yet, these 2000 years. 

It was at this critical juncture, to revive and stimulate the jaded 
hope of the Jewish believers and to spread the propaganda amongst 
the all-believing Pagans, that the written Christ-tales began to be 
worked up by the Christian propagandists. Before their admiring 
eyes they had for models the "whole literature" of Jewish apocryphal 
or forged writings, plus the Pagan Oracles : with immense zeal and 
industry they set about to imitate the example before them, and to 
ref orge these Jewish and heathen forgeries to more definite Christian 
uses, and to forge anew another whole literature of distinctively Chris- 
tian forgeries and fabulous histories of the Christ. "In this form of 
propaganda the Christians proved themselves to be apt pupils of the 
Jews. So common, indeed, had become in early Christian times, the 
invention of such oracles that Celsus terms Christians Sibyllistai, 
believers in sibyls, or sibyl-mongers" (EB. i, 246), that is, peddlers 
of Christian forgeries in Pagan form (Ib. p. 261). How great was 
this pious fabrication we can only judge from the two hundred, more 
or less, of false histories, gospels, epistles and revelations which have 
survived, entire or fragmentary, or by title only, through the long 
intervening centuries of faith, and of which 27 are yet cherished as of 
Divine inspiration. 


Before sketching the welter of these lying works of Christian hands 
and childish minds, we may define, by high priestly authority, the 


status of the problem of divine inspiration, and just how the notion of 
"canonicity" or official inspiration, came to be, now attributed to, 
now withdrawn from, this heterogeneous mass or mess of pious scrib- 
blings, and finally clung to only 27 of yet asserted sanctity. These 
admissions are very illuminating. 

We have seen that the Hebrew Old Testament itself "reveals no 
formal notion of inspiration," though, we are assured, "the later 
Jews must have possessed the idea" (CE. iii, 269) ; thus only an 
idea or notion somehow acquired, but not through divine illumination, 
for as we read, of all the mass of Jewish holy forgeries "each of them 
has at one time or another been treated as canonical" or divinely in- 
spired. (EB. i, 250.) Whether the Christian notion or idea as to the 
divine inspiration of their own new forgeries was of any better quality 
may now appear. 

The New Testament and the inspired Apostles are silent on the 
subject and left the matter to serious doubts and disputations for 
many centuries : "There are no indications in the New Testament . . . 
of a definite new Canon bequeathed by the Apostles to the Church, 
or of a strong self-witness to Divine inspiration," admits the CE. 
(iii, 274) ; that is, there is nothing in the 27 booklets which would 
lead to the suspicion of their "inspiration" or truth. There was then 
no Church for them to bequeath to, nor was the Canon settled, as 
we shall see : "It was not until about the middle of the second century 
[when we shall see the books were really written] that under the 
rubric of Scripture the New Testament writings were assimilated to 
the Old. . . . But it should be remembered that the inspired char- 
acter of the New Testament is a Catholic dogma, and must therefore 
in some way have been revealed to, and taught by, Apostles" ! (7&. 
p. 275.) This is a strikingly queer bit of clerical dialectic, and leaves 
the question of the "some way" of revelation to the Apostles and of 
their transmission of the "dogma" to posterity, in a nebulously un- 
satisfying state. 

Further, the dubious and disputed status of the sacred writings 
through centuries, and the ultimate settlement of the controversies 
by the ipse dixit of a numerical majority of the Council of Trent, in 
1546, after the Reformation had forced the issue, is thus admitted: 
"The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament 



existing from the beginning, that is, from Apostolic times, has no 
foundation in history. The canon of the New Testament, like that of 
the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated 
by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and re- 
tarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did 
not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine 
Council. . . . And this want of an organized distribution, secon- 
darily to the absence of an early fixation of the Canon, left room for 
variations and doubts which lasted far into the centuries." (CE. iii, 
274.) The modus operandi of the Holy Council in ultimately "canon- 
izing" Jerome's old Vulgate Version, and its motive for doing so, are 
thus exposed by the keen pen of the author of The Rise and Fall: 

"When the Council of Trent resolved to pronounce sentence on the 
Canon of Scripture, the opinion which prevailed, after some debate, 
was to declare the Latin Vulgate authentic and almost infallible; 
and this sentence, which was guarded by formidable anathemas, se- 
cured all the books of the Old and New Testament which composed 
that ancient version. . . . When the merit of that version was dis- 
cussed, the majority of the theologians urged, with confidence and 
success, that it was absolutely necessary to receive the Vulgate as 
authentic and inspired, unless they wished to abandon the victory 
to the Lutherans, and the honors of the Church to the Grammarians." 
(Gibbon, A Vindication, v, 2 ; Istoria del Consiglio Tridentino, L. ii, 
p. 147.) A number of these books were bitterly disputed and their 
authenticity and inspiration denied by the leading Reformers, Luther, 
Grotius, Calvin, etc., and excluded from their official lists, until finally 
the Reformed Church followed the example of the Church hopeless of 
reform and swallowed the canon whole, as we have it today, minus, 
of course, the Tobit, Judith, and like inspired buffooneries of the True 

Such books and the vicissitudes of their authenticity are thus de- 
scribed : "Like the Old Testament, the New has its deutero-canonical 
[i. e. doubted] books and portions of books, their canonicity having 
formerly been a subject of some controversy in the Church. These 
are, for entire books : the Epistle to the Hebrews, that of James, the 
Second and Third of John 9 Jude, and Apocalypse ; giving seven in all 
as the number of the N. T. contested books. The formerly disputed 


passages are three: the closing section of St. Mark's Gospel, xvi, 
9-20, about the apparitions of Christ after the resurrection; the 
verses in Luke about the bloody sweat of Jesus, xxii, 43, 44; the 
Pericope Advlterae, or narrative of the woman taken in adultery, St. 
John, vii, 53 to viii, 11. Since the Council of Trent it is not periwtUd 
for a Catholic to question the inspiration of these passages." (CE. iii, 
274.) Besides the forgery of the above and other books as a whole, 
we shall see many other instances of "interpolated" or forged pas- 
sages in the Christian books. 


Speaking of the doubtful historicity of the celebrated J2sop of 
the famous Fables which go under his name, a critic well states a valid 
test of historicity : "We may well doubt, however, whether he (jEsop) 
ever existed ; we have the most varied accounts of him, many of which 
are on their face pure inventions ; and the fables which passed under 
his name were certainly not written until long after the period in 
which he is supposed to have lived." (NIE. i, 191, ) We may have occa- 
sion to apply this test to the personality of Jesus of Nazareth and 
sundry apostolic personages ; in any event it is peculiarly applicable 
to the numerous Christian stories and fables treating of them, which on 
their face are pure inventions, and which were admittedly forged in 
the names of Jesus himself and of all of his Apostles and of many of 
the shining lights of the new Christian faith, just as we have seen 
was done in the Jewish forgeries in the names of the Old Testament 
notables from Adam on down the catalogue. 

Leaving for the moment aside the 27 presently accepted booklets 
of the N. T., and admitting the many Christian forgeries of Christ- 
fables, CE. thus apologetically explains : "The genuine Gospels are 
silent about long stretches of the life of our Lord, the Blessed Virgin, 
and St. Joseph. This reserve of the Evangelists did not satisfy the 
pardonable curiosity of many Christians eager for details. . . . En- 
terprising spirits responded to this natural craving by pretended 
gospels full of romantic fables, and fantastic and striking details; 
their fabrications were eagerly read and accepted as true by common 
folk who were devoid of any critical -faculty and who were predisposed 



to believe what so luxuriously fed their pious curiosity. Both Catholics 
and Gnostics were concerned in writing these fictions. The former had 
no motive other than that of a PIOUS FRAUD." (CE. i, 606,) The 
motive above admitted for feeding with pious frauds the "natural 
craving" of the ignorant and superstitious Christians for marvel- 
mongering by the Church, is confirmed by a distinguished historian: 
"A vast and ever-increasing crowd of converts from paganism, who 
had become such from worldly considerations, and still hankered after 
wonders like those in which their forefathers had from time imme- 
morial believed, lent a ready ear to assertions which, to more hesitating 
or better-instructed minds, would have seemed to carry imposture on 
their very face" (Draper, The Intellectual Development of Europe, 
i, 309.) 

This being thus frankly confessed, our clerical writer describes 
the general character of these pious frauds : "The Christian apocry- 
phal writings in general imitate the books of the N. T., and therefore, 
with a few exceptions, fall under the description of Gospels, Acts, 
Epistles, and Apocalypses." (CE. i, 606.) Further apologizing for 
these Christian forgeries, and giving a smear of clerical whitewash 
to the forgers, it is speciously pleaded, that "the term apocryphal in 
connection with special gospels must be understood as bearing no more 
unfavorable an import than uncanonical." They were forgeries pure 
and simple; and their pious value is urged, that "the apocryphal 
Gospels help us to understand the religious conditions of the second 
and third centuries," as indeed they do, in a light very damaging 
to any suspicion of truthfulness, common honesty, or anything above 
the most mediocre intelligence of the pious Fathers and Faithful who 
put these gross fabrications into circulation in the name and for the 
sake of Christ. Their pious plea is : "Amor Christi est cui satisfecimus." 
(Ib. p. 606.) Of these pious frauds it adds: "The quasi-evangelistic 
compositions concerning Christ . . . are all of Orthodox origin." 
(Ib. p. 607.) 

When the new Faith went forth to conquer the Pagan world for 
Christ, the pious Greek Fathers and priests of the Propaganda soon 


felt the need of something of more up-to-date effectiveness than Old 
Testament texts and Sibylline Oracles ; they needed something con- 
crete out of the New Dispensation to "show" to the superstitious Pa- 
gans to win them to the Christ and his Church : something tangible, 
visible; compellingly authentic proofs. Like arms of proof for the 
holy warfare, the invincible weapons of truth "the whole armour of 
God" they forged outright for the conquest of the unbeliever. What 
more convincing and compelling proofs of Jesus the Christ, his holy 
Apostles, and their wondrous works of over a century ago, than the 
following authentic and autograph documents and records, held before 
doubting eyes : 








Armed with lying credentials and "proofs" of the fictitious persons 
and performances for which credence must be won among the credu- 
lous pagans, the priests and Vicars of God propagated their stupen- 
dous "LIES to the glory of God" and the exaltation of the Church. 
We shall catalogue these crude forgeries somewhat more fully, and 
look into some of the more notorious. 


Half a hundred of false and forged Apostolic "Gospels of Jesus 
Christ," together with more numerous other "Scripture" forgeries, 
was the output, so far as known now, of the lying pens of the pious 
Christians of the first two centuries of the Christian "Age of Apoc- 
ryphal Literature"; all going to swell the "very large number of 



apocryphal writings of distinctly Christian origin which were pro- 
duced from the second century onward, to satisfy an unhealthy crav- 
ing for the occult and marvelous or to embellish the stories of the 
saints." (NIE. 9 i, 746.) These N. T. apocrypha include "numerous 
worts purporting to have been written "by apostles or their associates, 
but not able to secure a general or permanent recognition. These may 
be classified thus: (a) Gospels; (b) Acts of Apostles; (c) Epistles; 
(d) Apocalypses; (e) Didactic Works; (f) Hymns. (Ib. p. 748.) 
"The name Gospel," says CE. (vi, 656), "as indicating a written ac- 
count of Christ's words and deeds, has been, and still is, applied to 
a large number of narratives of Christ's life, which circulated both be- 
fore and after the composition of our Third Gospel (cf. Luke i, 1-4). 
The titles of some fifty such works have come down to us. ... It is 
only, however, in connection with some twenty of these 'Gospels' that 
some information has been preserved. . . . Most of them, as far as 
can be made out, are late productions, the apocryphal character of 
which is generally admitted by contemporary [i. e., present day] 
scholars." Naming first as Nos. 1-4 "The Canonical Gospels," now 
falsely labelled with the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, 
the twenty best known ones are listed as follows; mz: The Gospels 
according to the Hebrews ; of Peter ; According to the Egyptians ; of 
Matthias ; of Philip ; of Thomas ; the Proto-Evangeliwm of James ; 
Gospel of Nicodemus (Acta Pilati) ; of the Twelve Apostles ; of Basil- 
ides ; of Valentius ; of Marcion ; of Eve ; of Judas ; the Writing Genna 
Marias ; the Gospel Teldoseos. (CE. vi, 656.) 

Individual Gospels were forged in the names of each of the Twelve 
Apostles, severally, and a joint fabrication under the name of "The 
Gospel of the Twelve," was put into the mouths of the twelve Apostles, 
using the first person to give the ear-marks of authenticity to their 
forged utterances ; and separately, "Almost every one of the Apostles 
had a Gospel fathered upon him by one early sect or another." (EB. 
i, 259.) Several seem to have been fathered upon Matthew besides the 
one that wrongly heads the list of the "canonical Four," such as the 
Gospel of Matthias, Traditions of Matthias, also a supposed and 
probably non-eaAstent writing in Hebrew hypothesized as the basic 
document of the Four ; probably also the so-called Logia, a papyrus 
scrap of one sheet discovered at Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, and containing 


alleged sayings of Jesus which in part correspond with, in part radi- 
cally differ from the sayings attributed to him in the Four. He was 
also made responsible for a so-called Gospel of St. Matthew, dating 
from the 4th or 5th century, which "purports to have been written 
by Matthew and translated by St. Jerome." (CE. i, 608.) 

This authority also lists the famous Prot evangelism Jacobi, or 
Infancy Gospel of James, the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy, that of 
Gamaliel, the Gospel according to the Hebrews, also According to the 
Egyptians ; of the Nazarenes ; Gospels of St. Peter, of St. Philip, 
of St. Thomas, of St. Bartholomew, of St. Andrew, of Barnabas, of 
Thaddeus, even notable forged Gospels of Judas Iscariot, and of 
Mother Eve ; also the Gospel by Jesus Christ. We have the Gospel of 
Nicodemus, the History of Joseph the Carpenter, the Descent into 
Hades, the Descent of Mary, the Ascents of James, the Prophecy of 
Hystaspes, the Didache or Teachings of the Apostles; the Gospel 
of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary, the Transitum Marios or Evange- 
lium Joannis. This last named pious Christian work, as described by 
CE, (i, 607-8) is forged in the name of St. John the Apostle, and is 
"prefaced with a spurious Letter of the Bishop of Sardis, Melito" ; 
it records how "the Apostles, are preternaturally transported from 
different quarters of the globe to the Virgin's deathbed, those who 
have died being resurrected for the purpose" ; a Jew who dares touch 
the sacred body instantly loses both hands, which are restored through 
the mediation of the Apostles. Christ, accompanied by a band of 
angels, comes down to receive his mother's soul; "the Apostles bear 
the body to Gethsemane and deposit it in a tomb, whence it is taken 
up alive to Heaven"; this being an extraordinary miracle, for the 
body was dead and the soul carried to heaven from her home and the 
dead body laid in the grave, where it comes to life again for the 
Heaventrip. This clumsy fable, says CJEJ., considerably "influenced 
the Fathers" (76. i, 608), who were notoriously childish-minded. A 
very noted and notorious forgery was the Gospel of Paul and Thecla, 
of which Father Tertullian relates, that this story was fabricated by 
an Elder of Asia Minor, who, when convicted of the fraud [this 
being the only known instance of such action], confessed that he 
had perpetrated it "for the love of St. Paul." (Reinach, Orpheus, p. 
235.) The Protevangelvww, Jacobi was "an Apocryphal work by a 



fanciful fabulist, unhampered by knowledge of Jewish affairs, com- 
posed before the end of the second century with a view to removing 
the glaring contradictions between Matthew and Mark," regarding 
the birth and life of Jesus Christ. (EB. iii, 3343.) An "Epistle on the 
Martyrdom of the Apostles Peter and Paul was at a later period at- 
tributed to St. Linus. ... It is apocryphal, and of later date than 
the History of the Martyrdom of the two Apostles, by some attrib- 
uted to Marcellus, which is also apocryphal." (CE. ix, 273; see Acta 
Apostolorum, Apocrypha, xiv.) Other noted Fatherly fabrications 
were the celebrated Epistles I and II of Clement to the Corinthians, 
and the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions and Homilies, purporting 
to be written by the very doubtful Bishop of Rome of that name; 
very voluminous, and written about 140 A. r., not a line of New Testa- 
ment "scriptures" do they quote, but they quote freely from the 0. T. 
and from various Jewish, Christian and Pagan works. (EB, iii, 3486.) 

Besides the above complete "Gospel" forgeries, there are several 
more, and fragments of others, which purport to contain "sayings" 
attributed to Jesus which are not contained in the Four Gospels ; and 
which are known as Agrapha, that is, things not written. Among 
these are the Logia of Oxyrhynchus above mentioned; the Fayum 
gospel-fragment, a papyrus purporting to give words of Christ to 
Peter at the Last Supper, "in a form which diverges largely by omis- 
sions from any in the canonical gospels." (EB. i, 258.) These Agrapha 
"do not embrace the lengthy sections ascribed to Jesus in the *Didi$- 
caLia 9 and the 'Pistis Sophia 9 ; these works also contain some brief 
quotations of Alleged words of Jesus ; ... nor the Sayings contained 
in religious romances, such as we find in the apocryphal Gospels, 
the apocryphal Acts, or the Letter of Christ to Abgar. ... In 
patristic citations . . . Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, 
Origen, make false quotations," citing instances. (CE. i, 225, 226.) 
In the class of Agrapha are also "words in the Gospels not regarded 
as genuine, as Mt. vi, 13b ; xvii, 21 ; Mk. xvi, 9-20 ; John via, 53 ; viii, 
2 ; also alleged quotations from the Old Testament in the New Testa- 
ment not found in the Old Testament." (NIE. i, 240.) 

Of apocryphal Acts of Apostles we are edified by the Acts, or 
Travels (Greek, Pereodoi) of Peter, (and separately) of John, of 
Thomas, of Andrew, and of Paul ; another Acts of Philip, Acts of 


Matthew, of Bartholomew, of John, of Judas Thomas. There is a 
whose collection of Martyrdoms of the several Apostles. Of apocry- 
phal Epistles, the most famous is the Correspondence between the 
Abgar of Edessa, and Jesus ; between the Roman Philosopher Seneca 
and Paul; apocryphal Epistles of Paul, to the Laodiceans, to the 
Alexandrians, the Third Epistle to the Corinthians. Forged Apoc- 
alypses abound, of which that of Peter, the Vision of Hermas, the 
Vision of Paul, the Apocalypse of Paul, the Apocalypse of the Virgin 
Mary. The didactic Preaching of Peter, the Teaching of the Apostles, 
or Didache, containing warnings against Judaism and polytheism, 
and words of Jesus to the Apostles ; another set containing a lament of 
Peter for his denial of Jesus, and various ethical maxims ; a Syriac 
Preaching of Simon Cephas ; a collection of Hymns or Odes of Solo- 
mon. As if these were not enough for Christian edification, "many 
heretical or Gnostic works of the same apocryphal kind were changed 
into orthodox by expurgation of objectionable matter or by rewriting, 
using the same outlines ; thus a series of Catholic Acts was produced, 
written from an orthodox standpoint." (NIE. i, 748.) A very cele- 
brated forgery was the Shepherd of Hermas, forged by Hermas, 
supposed brother of Pius, Bishop of Rome, about 150 A D. See the 
vast catalogue (CE. i, 601-615). 

A whole literature of Christian forgery grew up and had immense 
vogue under the designation of A eta Pilati, or Acts of Pilate. One of 
the most popular of these was called the Gospel of Nicodemus, of 
which CE. says : "The alleged Hebrew original is attributed to Nico- 
demus ; the title is of medieval origin. The apocryphon gained wide 
credit in the Middle Ages. . . . The *Acta J are of orthodox compo- 
sition. The book aimed at gratifying the desire for extra-evangelical 
details concerning our Lord, and at the same time, to strengthen 
faith in the Resurrection of Christy and at general edification." (i, 3.) 
The Descent into Hades is an enlargement of the reputed official acts 
or reports of Pilate to the Roman Emperor. Speaking of the Pilate' 
Literature as a whole, the Catholic Encyclopedia, in a paragraph 
which pointedly admits the falsifying frauds of three luminous liars 
and forgers of the Faith, Justin Martyr, the great Bishop Eusebius, 
and Father Tertullian, explains that these A eta "dwell upon the 
part which a representative [Pilate] of the Roman Empire played 



in the supreme events of our Lord's life, and to shape the testimony 
of Pontius Pilate, even at the cost of exaggeration and amplification 
[hear the soft-pedaling note], into a weapon of apologetic defense, 
making the official bear witness to the miracles, Crucifixion, and Res- 
urrection of Jesus Christ. ... It is characterized by exaggerating 
Pilate's weak defense of Jesus into a strong sympathy and practical 
belief in his Divinity. 9 * (CE. i, 609.) Father Tertullian, in his Apo- 
logia (xxi), relates the Report of Pilate to the Emperor, sketching the 
miracles and death of Jesus Christ, and says, "All these things Pilate 
announced to Tiberius Caesar." Bishop Eusebius thus relates the fable 
as taken from the Apologia of Father Tertullian : "The fame of Our 
Lord's remarkable resurrection and ascension being now spread 
abroad, . . . Pontius Pilate transmits to Tiberius an account of the 
circumstances concerning the resurrection of our Lord from the 
dead. ... In this account, he also intimated that he had ascertained 
other miracles respecting him, and that having now risen from the 
dead, he was believed to be a God by the great mass of the people. 
Tiberius referred the matter to the Senate, . . . being obviously 
pleased with the doctrine ; but the Senate, as they had not proposed 
the matter, [rejected it]. But he continued in his opinion, threatening 
death to the accusers of the Christians ; a divine providence infusing 
this into his mind, that the Gospel having freer scope in its commence- 
ment, might spread everywhere over the world." (Eusebius, HE. II, 
2.) Father Justin Martyr, in his Apologia, "appeals confidently as a 
proof of them to the 'Acta* or records of Pilate, existing in the im- 
perial archives." Eusebius relates spurious anti-Christian. Acts of 
Pilate composed in the fourth century, the Acta Pilati or Gospel of 
Nicodemus, Anphora Pttati, Paradoseis; a still later fabrication is 
the Latin Epistola Pilati ad Tiberwm. Also the Letter of Herod to 
Pilate and Letter of Pilate to Herod; the Narrative of Joseph of 
Arimathea. The pseudo-Correspondence of Jesus with Abgar, King 
of Edessa, is found in Eusebius (Hist. Eccles., I, xiii), "who vouches 
that he himself translated it from the Syiiac documents in the ar- 
chives of Edessa, the metropolis of Eastern Syria. . , . *Thi$ 5 5 adds 
Eusebius, 'happened in the year 340 of the Seleucid era, correspond- 
ing to A. D. 28-29.' (CE. i, 609, 610.) More monumental lies to the 
glory of God than those of the distinguished Church Fathers are not,, 


"A collection of apocryphal Acts of the Apostles was formed in the 
Prankish Church in the sixth century, probably by a monk." (76. p. 
610.) There were also "the works accredited to Dionysius the Areo- 
pagite, who was not the author of the works bearing his name." (16. 
p. 638.) 

Of highest importance because "these Acts are the chief source 
for details of the martyrdom of the two great Apostles," as admits 
the CE., special notice is made of the "Catholic" Acts of Sts. Peter 
and Paul, of which many MSS of "the legend" existed, the material 
import of which is thus not quite honestly summarized: "The Jews 
have been aroused by the news of Paul's intended visit (to Rome), 
and induce Nero to forbid it. Nevertheless the Apostle secretly enters 
Italy ; his companion is mistaken for himself at Puteoli and beheaded* 
In retribution that city is swallowed up by the sea. Peter receives 
Paul at Rome with joy. The preaching of the Apostles converts mul- 
titudes and even the Empress. Simon Magus traduces the Christian 
teachers, and there is a test of strength in miracles between that magi- 
cian and the Apostles, which takes place in the presence of Nero. 
Simon essays a flight to heaven but falls in the Via Sacra and is 
dashed to pieces. Nevertheless, Nero is bent on the destruction of 
Peter and Paul. The latter is beheaded on the Ostian Way, and Peter 
is crucified at his request head downward. Before his death he relates 
to the people the 'Quo Vadis? 9 story. Three men from the East carry 
off the Apostles' bodies but are overtaken. St. Peter is buried at 'the 
place called the Vatican, 5 and Paul on the Ostian Way. These Acts 
are the chief source for details of the martyrdom of the two great 
Apostles. They are also noteworthy as emphasizing the close concord 
between the Apostolic founders of the Roman Church." (CE. i, 

The reader is desired to bear well in mind the foregoing paragraph, 
and particularly the last two sentences, the former of immense sig- 
nificance when we come to review the falsified fiction of the foundation 
of the Roman Church by Peter, the "chief source" of which porten- 
tous claim is confessedly founded on the crude and fantastic "legend 5 * 
of an admittedly forged document. Another admission of forgery by 
the Fathers, before introducing them formally, may be noted: "Such 
known works as the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, 


tlie Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and the Apostolic 
Canons and Constitutions, though formally apocryphal, really be- 
long to patristic literature" (CE. i, 601), that is, they are forged 
writings of the Fathers. 

The "Apostles' Creed," forged by the Fathers several centuries 
after the Apostles, must be added to the Patristic list. Of this fa- 
mous Creed, which every Christian presumably knows by rote and 
piously recites in numberless services, CE. again confesses it spurious : 
"Throughout the Middle Ages it was generally believed that the 
Apostles, on the day of Pentecost, while still under the direct inspira- 
tion of the Holy Ghost, composed our present Creed, each of the 
Apostles contributing one of the Twelve articles. This legend dates 
back to the sixth century, and is foreshadowed still earlier in a sermon 
attributed to St. Ambrose, which takes notice that the Creed was 
'pieced out by twelve separate workmen.* " (CE. i, 629.) Indeed, "not 
a few works have been falsely attributed to St. Ambrose." (CE. i, 
387; cf. p. 406.) 

We may smile at the peculiarly clerical way in which CE. would 
"whitewash" the great Bishop of Milan, St. Ambrose (c. 340-397), 
from the lie direct which admittedly he told in that Sermon, saying 
that the Bishop simply "takes notice that the Creed was pieced out, 5 ' 
etc.; the truth being that Ambrose positively affirmed the fable as 
truth, and may have invented it. His positive words are : "that the 
Twelve Apostles, as skilled artificers, assembled together, and made^ 
a key by their common advice, that is, the Creed ; by which the dark- 
ness of the devil is disclosed, that the light of Christ may appear." 
(Ambrose, Opera, torn, iii., Sermon 38, p. 265 ; quoted in The New 
Testament Apocrypha, New York, The Truth Seeker Co.) a work 
which I feel impelled to commend to all who wish to know at first hand 
the 25 remarkable Church "Gospel" forgeries there collected. 


In likewise the celebrated Athanasian Creed of the Church, attrib- 
uted to St. Athanasius and so held by the Church "until the seven- 


teenth century" (CE. ii, 34), with most evil results, is now an admitted 
forgery. In words of Gibbon : "St. Athanasius is not the author of the 
creed ; it does not appear to have existed within a century after his 
death ; it was composed in Latin, therefore in one of the Western prov- 
inces. Gennadius, patriarch of Constantinople, was so much amazed 
by this extraordinary composition, that he frankly pronounced it 
to be the work of a drunken man." (Petav. Dogmat. Theologica 9 torn, 
ii, 1, vii, c. 8, p. 687 ; Gibbon, p. 598.) 


We may look for a moment at several of the most notorious of the 
forgeries perpetrated for the glory of God and for imposture upon 
the superstitious Christians to enhance Pagan credulity in the tales 
of Christ. If the Gospel tales were true, why should God need pious 
lies to give them credit? Lies and forgeries are only needed to bolster 
up falsehood: "Nothing stands in need of lying but a lie." But Jesus 
Christ must needs be propagated by lies upon lies ; and what better 
proof of his actuality than to exhibit letters written by him in his 
own handwriting? The "Little Liars of the Lord" were equal to the 
forgery of the signature of their God, false letters in his name, as 
above cited from that exhaustless mine of clerical falsities, the Catho- 
lic Encyclopedia, which again describes them, and proves that they 
were forged by their great Bishop of Csesaria : "The historian Euse- 
bius records \HE. I, xii], a legend which he himself firmly believes 
[?], concerning a correspondence that took place between Our Lord 
and the local potentate (Abgar) at Edessa. Three documents relate 
to this correspondence: (1) the Letter of Abgar to Our Lord; (2) 
Our Lord's answer; (3) a picture of Our Lord, painted from life. 
This legend enjoyed a great popularity, both in the East, and in the 
West, during the Middle Ages. Our Lord's Letter was copied on 
parchment, marble, and metal, and used as a talisman or an amulet." 
(CE. i, 42.) But it is not true, as we have seen already confessed, 
that Eusebius innocently believed that these forgeries were genuine 
for they were all shamelessly forged by Eusebius himself : "who vouches 
that he himself translated it from the Syriac documents in the archives 
of Edessa." (CE. i, 610.) Again it is said by CE., that these forged 



letters, with the portrait, were "accepted by Eusebius without hesita- 
tion, and used by Addision in his work on Christian Evidences as gen- 
uine" (/&, vi, 217). 

It should be mentioned, first, that Abgar was not a personal name 
of a King of Edessa, but was a generic title of all the rulers of that 
small state: "By this title all the toparchs of Edessa were called, just 
as the Roman Emperors were called Caesars, the Kings of Egypt 
Pharaohs or Ptolemies, the Kings of Syria Antiochi." (ANF. viii, 
651, note.) With this first check on the forging Bishop, here is what 
he said in his Church History, Book I, chapter the thirteenth, (p. 63 
seq.) Note the false fervor of the holy Bishop to sugar-coat his cir- 
cumstantial and commodious lie and fraud : "While the Godhead of our 
Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ was proclaimed among all men by 
reason of the astonishing mighty-works which He wrought, and 
myriads, even from countries remote from the land of Judaea, who 
were afflicted with sicknesses and diseases of every kind, were coming 
to Him in the hope of being healed, King Abgar sent Him a letter ask- 
ing Him to come and heal him of his disease. But our Saviour at the 
time he asked Him did not comply with his request. Yet He deigned to 
give him a letter in reply. . . . Thou hast in writing the evidence of 
these things, which is taken from the Book of Records which was at 
Edessa : for at that time the Kingdom was still standing. In the docu- 
ments, then, which were there, in which was contained whatever was 
done by those of old down to the time of Abgar, these things are also 
found preserved down to the present hour. There is, however, nothing 
to prevent our hearing the very letters themselves, which have been 
taken by us from the archives, and are in words to this effect, trans- 
lated from Aramaic into Greek. 

"Copy of the letter which was written by King Abgar to Jesus, and 
sent to Him by the hand of Ananias [the Bishop was the Ananias 
in this tale, and aptly named his letter-carrier], the Tabularius, to 
Jerusalem : 

'Abgar the Black, sovereign of the country, to Jesus, the good Saviour, 
who has appeared in the country of Jerusalem: Peace. I have heard about 
Thee, and about the healing which is wrought by Thy hands without drugs 
and roots. For, as it is reported, Thou makest the blind to see, and the lame 
to walk; and Thou cleansest the lepers, and Thou castest out unclean spir- 


its and demons, and Thou healest those who are tormented with lingering 
diseases, and Thou raisest the dead. And when I heard all these things 
about Thee, I settled in my mind one of two things : either that Thou art 
God, who has come down from heaven, and doest these things ; or that Thou 
art the Son of God, and doest these things. On this account, therefore, I 
have written to beg of Thee that Thou wouldest weary Thyself to come to 
me, and heal this disease which I have. For I have also heard that the Jews 
murmur against Thee, and wish to do Thee harm. But I have a city, small 
and beautiful, which is sufficient for two/ 

"Copy of those things *which were written by Jesus in reply by the 
hand of Ananias, the Tabularius, to Abgar, sovereign of the 
country : 

'Blessed is he that believeth in me, not having seen me. For it is written 
concerning me, that those who see me will not believe in me, and that those 
will believe who have not seen me, and will be saved. But touching that 
which thou hast written to me, that I should come to thee it is meet that 
I should finish here all that for the sake of which I have been sent; and, 
after I have finished it, then I shall be taken up to Him that sent me; 
and, when I have been taken up, I will send to thee one of my disciples, that 
he may heal thy disease, and give salvation to thee and to those who are 
with thee.' 

"To these letters, moreover, is appended the following, also in the 
Aramaic tongue"; here following the official record of the visit 
of one "Thaddaeus the apostle, one of the Seventy," and his wonder- 
ful works in Edessa. "These things were done in the year 340. In 
order, moreover, that these things may not have been translated to 
no purpose word for word from the Aramaic into Greek, they are 
placed in their order of time here. Here endeth the first book." (HE. i, 
13; ANF. viii, 651-653.) Bishop Eusebius is thus seen to have been 
a most circumstantial liar and a well-skilled forger for God. From this 
episcopal lie sprouted like toadstools a whole literature of "various 
books concerning Abgar the King and Thaddseus the Apostle," in 
which are preserved to posterity a series of five letters very much 
in the style of modern patent-medicine testimonials written by 
Abgar to Tiberius Caesar and to neighboring potentates, endorsing 
Jesus and his healing powers ; with a reply from Tiberius declaring 
that "Pilate has officially informed us of the miracles of Jesus." With 



respect to the other letters testimonial, it is recorded : "Abgar had not 
yet received answers to these letters when he died, having reigned 
thirty-eight years." (Ibid. pp. 657-741, 706.) 

These crass episcopal forgeries were welcomed into the Church, and 
for fifteen centuries have gone unrebuked by Pope or Church. Even 
since the Reformation so strong was the belief in the Abgar-Jesus 
forgeries, that notable prelates in England, including Archbishop 
Cave, have "strenuously contended for their admission into the canon 
of Scripture. . . . The Reverend Jeremiah Jones observes, that 
common people in England have this Epistle in their houses, in many 
places, fixed in a frame, with the picture of Christ before it ; and that 
they generally, with much honesty and devotion, regard it as the word 
of God, and the genuine Epistle of Christ." (Quoted in editorial note to 
the Epistles, in The Lost Books of the Bible, p. 62.) To such state of 
superstitious credulity does the Church with its pious impostures 
prostitute the minds of its ignorant and credulous votaries. The por- 
trait of Jesus, referred to above, is said, in other versions of the 
Letter, to have been sent by Jesus to the King ; this portrait is now 
displayed at both Rome and Genoa. (NIE. i, 38.) 


The pious fancy of the Fathers forged another official Letter, in 
the name of what CE. calls "a fictitious person," one Lentulus, pre- 
tended predecessor of Pilate as governor of Judaea, to the Roman 
Senate, giving a description of the personal appearance of Jesus 
Christ, and closing with the words, "He is the most beautiful of the 
sons of men." This letter, says CE. "was certainly apocryphal"; it 
was first printed in the Life of Christ, by Ludolph the Cartusian ; 
though it is thought to be traceable to the time of Diocletian. (CE. 
ix, 154.) This notion of the personal beauty of Jesus is not shared by 
the "tradition" of the Fathers ; for Jesus Christ is declared by Cyril 
of Alexandria to have been "the ugliest of the sons of men" ; a tradition 
also declared by Fathers Justin Martyr and Tertullian; to offset 
which evil notion there was forged "a beautiful Letter, purporting to 
have been written by Lentulus to the Roman Senate." (76. vi, 235.) 
But St. Augustine, says CJJ-, "mentions that in his time there was 


no authentic portrait of Christ, and that the type of features was still 
undetermined, so that we have absolutely no knowledge of His ap- 
pearance." (De Trinitate, lib. vii, ch. 4, 5 ; CE. vi, 211, n.) 

This, however, is contrary to the venerated Church fable and artis- 
tic forgery current under the title of "St. Veronica's Veil," based on 
the tale in Luke (xxvii, 27) of the woman of Jerusalem who offered to 
Jesus a linen cloth to wipe his face as he was carrying his cross to- 
wards Calvary. On wiping his sweating face, the supposed authentic 
likeness of the features of the Christ was miraculously impressed upon 
the cloth. The lucky lady "went to Rome, bringing with her this image 
of Christ, which was long exposed to public veneration. To her are 
likewise traced several other relics of the Blessed Virgin venerated in 
several Churches of the West. To distinguish at Rome the oldest and 
best known of these images it was called vera icon (true image), which 
ordinary language soon made veronica . . . By degrees popular 
imagination mistook this word for the name of a person" (CE. xv, 
362), and, Lo! Saint Veronica emerges from the canonized Saint- 
mill of Holy Church. Here we plainly see myth-in-the-making ; and 
may appreciate the moral splendor as well as crafty thriftiness of the 
Church of God which thus supplies its Faithful ready-made with one 
of the most cherished female Saints of the Calendar, a confessed 
myth and forgery. His Holiness especially displayed and vouched 
for this fake on March 19, 1930, when he preached his crusade against 
Russia. But the Church also, in the Roman Martyrology, credits this 
holy icon to Milan, so as to fool many other Faithful. (/&. p. 363.) 
This mythical female Saint "has also been confounded with a pious 
woman who, according to [Bishop] Gregory of Tours, brought to the 
neighboring town of Bazas some drops of the blood of John the 
Baptist, at whose beheading she was present," and CE. doesn't even 
wink. (/&.) 


So many confessed Christian forgeries in Pagan and Christian 
names having been wrought to testify to Jesus Christ, it was, "one 
naturally expects," says CE., that a Jewish "writer so well informed 
as Josephus" must know and tell about Jesus ; "one naturally expects, 



therefore, a notice about Jesus Christ in Josephus." And with pride 
it pursues : "Antiquities, VIII, iii, 3, seems to satisfy this expectation." 
It proceeds to quote the passage, which differeth only as one trans- 
lation naturally differs from another, from that in the Whitson trans- 
lation ; so I follow CE. In Chapter iii Josephus treats of "Sedition of 
the Jews against Pontius Pilate" ; in section 1 he relates the cause and 
the suppression of the mutiny, the ensigns of the army displaying the 
idolatrous Roman Eagle, brought into the Holy City ; in section 2 he 
tells of the action of Pilate in bringing "a current of water to Jerusa- 
lem, and did it with the sacred money," thus again arousing a clash 
with the fanatics ; "there were great numbers of them slain by this 
means." Passing for the moment the notorious section 3, Josephus the 
Jew begins section 4 : "About the same time, also, another sad calamity 
put the Jews in disorder," which he proceeds to relate, ending the long 
chapter. Note that these section numbers were not put in by Josephus, 
but are modern editor's devices to facilitate citation, like the chapters 
and verses in the Bible. And now for the much-debated section, sand- 
wiched, in a whole chapter on "Seditions of the Jews," between the ac- 
counts of two massacres of his countrymen and "another sad calam- 
ity" ; and thus we read note the parentheses of CE. (viii, 376) : 

"About this time/' quotes CE., "appeared Jesus, a wise man (if indeed 
it is right to call Him a man ; for He was a worker of astonishing deeds, a 
teacher of such men as receive the truth with joy), and He drew to Him- 
self many Jews (and many also of the Greeks. This was the Christ). And 
when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had 
condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not aban- 
don Him. (For He appeared to them alive on the third day, the holy proph- 
ets having foretold this and countless other marvels about Him.) The tribe 
of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day." (sec. 3.) 

About this time, also "another sad calamity [ ? ] put the Jews into 
disorder," (sec. 4) continues Josephus. CE, devotes over three long 
columns to the task of trying to prove that this section 3, or at least 
"the portions not in parentheses" is genuine, and was written, 
sometime before his death in 94 A. D., by the Jewish Pharisee, Josephus. 
"A testimony so important, 55 " well says CE., "could not escape the 
critics, 55 and it has not. We cannot follow the lengthy and labored 
arguments ; the simple reading of the section, in its bizarre context, 


and a moment's reflection, condemn it as a pious Christian forgery. 
If the Pharisee Josephus wrote that paragraph, he must have believed 
that Jesus was the Prophesied Messiah of his people "This was the 
Christ 9 " Josephus is made to aver ; he must then needs have been of 
"the tribe of Christians named after Him.'* But whatever Josephus 
may have said about Jesus is, indeed, not "a testimony so important" 
when we remember what he did aver that he saw with his own eyes : 
the pillar of salt into which Mrs. Lot was turned; and Eleazar the 
magician drawing the devil by a ring and Solomonic incantations, 
through the nose of one possessed, before Vespasian and all his army. 
If Josephus had written that he knew Jesus the Christ personally, and 
had personally seen him ascend into heaven through the roof of the 
room in Jerusalem (Mk. xvi, 19, 20), or from the open countryside by 
Bethany (Lk. xxiv, 50, 51), or "on the mount called Olivet" (Acts i, 
9, 12), we should remember that pillar of salt and that devil-doctor, 
and smile. 

But, when and how did this famous passage get into The Antiq- 
wties of the Jews? it is pertinent to ask. The first mention ever made 
of this passage, and its text, are in the Church History of that "very 
dishonest writer," Bishop Eusebius, in the fourth century, he who 
forged the Letters between Abgar and Jesus, falsely declaring that he 
had found the original documents in the official archives, whence he 
had copied and translated them into his Ecclesiastical History. CE. 
admits, and I have the Contra Celswm here before me, that "the 
above cited passage was not known to Origen and the earlier patristic 
writers," though they copied from Josephus the forged tale of the 
Letter of Aristeas about the translating of the Septuagint ; and "its 
very place in the Josephan text is uncertain, since Eusebius (Hist, 
EccL, II, vi) must have -found it before the notices concerning Pilate, 
while it now stands after them" (HE. I, ii, p. 63) ; and it makes the 
curious argument, which implies a confession : "But the spuriousness 
of the disputed Josephan passage does not imply the historian's igno- 
rance of the facts connected with Jesus Christ" ! For a wonder, that "a 
writer so well informed as Josephus" should not, perhaps, know by 
hearsay, sixty years after Jesus Christ, some of the remarkable things 
circulated about him in current country-side gossip (if, indeed, it 
were then current). But the fact is, 'that with the exception of this 



one incongruous forged passage, section 3, the wonder-mongering 
Josephus makes not the slightest mention of his wonder-working 
fellow-countryman, Jesus the Christ, though some score of other 
Joshuas, or Jesuses, are recorded by him, nor does he mention any of 
his transcendent wonders. But, as CE. and I were saying, none of the 
Fathers, before Eusebius (about 324), knew or could find a word in the 
works of Josephus, of this momentous "testimony to Jesus," over a 
century after Origen. That it did not eocist in the time of Origen is ex- 
plicit by his own words ; he cites the supposed references by Josephus 
to John the Baptist and to James, and expressly says that Josephus 
ought to have spoken of Jesus instead of James ; though Origen does 
not correctly describe the reference to James ; and the James passage, 
if not that also about John, has a suspicious savor of interpolation. 

For a clear understanding of this, I will quote the passage of 
Origen in his work against Celsus ; it completely refutes the claim that 
Josephus wrote the disputed and forged section 3. Origen says : 

"I would like to say to Celsus, who represents the Jew accepting John 
somehow as a Baptist, who baptized Jesus, that the existence of John the 
Baptist, baptizing for the remission of sins, is related by one who lived 
no great time after John and Jesus. For in the 18th book of his Antiquities 
of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and 
as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this 
writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the 
cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple [said that 
it was 'to avenge James the Just'], whereas he ought to have said that the 
conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the 
people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says neverthe- 
less being, although against his will, not far from the truth that these 
disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the 
Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ), the Jews having put 
him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice." 
(Origen, Contra Celsum, I, xlvii; ANF. iv, 416.) 

Josephus is thus quoted as bearing witness to John the Baptist, 
not as the Heaven-sent "forerunner" of the Christ, but simply as a 
Jewish religious teacher and baptizer on his own account ; and not a 
word by Josephus about the Christ, in whom it is admitted that he 
did not believe as such, nor even mentions as the most illustrious of 


those baptized by John, to the wondrous accompaniment of a voice 
from Heaven and the Holy Ghost in dove-like descent upon his head 
as he came up from the water. But Origen, in his effort to get some 
Christian testimony from him, misquotes Josephus and makes him say 
that John was baptizing "for the remission of sins," whereas Josephus 
expressly says that the efficacy of John's baptism was not for remis- 
sion of sin but for the purification of the body, as any washing would 
be. To vindicate Josephus against Origen, the former's words are 
quoted. Josephus recounts the defeat of Herod by Aretas, king of 
Arabia Petrea ; and goes on to say : 

"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army 
came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did 
against John, that was called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was 
a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to right- 
eousness toward one another, and piety toward God, and so to come to 
baptism; for that the washing would be acceptable to him, if they made 
use of it, not in order to the putting away of some sins, but for the purifi- 
cation of the body: supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified 
beforehand by righteousness. Now, when many others came in crowds about 
him, for they were greatly moved by hearing his words, Herod, who feared 
lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his 
power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any- 
thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to pre- 
vent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by 
sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. 
Accordingly, he was sent -a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to 
Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death." 
(Josephus, Antiq. Jews, Bk. XVIII, v, 2.) 

Beginning in section 4 of the same Book, and at length in various 
chapters, Josephus goes into details regarding Salome ; but never a 
word of the famous dance-act and of the head of John the Baptist being 
brought in on a charger to gratify her murderous whim ; the historical 
reason for the murder of John was political, not amorous or jealous, 
as related by Gospel-truth. 

Father Origen again falls into error in citing Josephus, this time 
in the dubious passage where Josephus, who does not believe in the 
Christ, yet gives him that title in speaking of the death of James. With 
typical clerical bent Father Origen imputes the fall of Jerusalem and 



the destruction of the temple to the sin of the Jews in crucifying the 
Christ ; and says that Josephus, in seeking the cause of the disasters 
which befell the Holy City and people, attributes them to the killing of 
the Christ's brother. The Holy City and temple were destroyed in 
70 A. D., which was well after the time of the supposititious James, as 
his demise is recorded in the suspected passage of Josephus. He relates 
the death of Festus, which was in 62 A, D., the appointment by Nero 
of Albinus as his successor, and the murder of James at the instiga- 
tion of the high priest Ananus, before Albinus can arrive. This sen- 
tence is to be read in the text of Josephus : 

"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he (An- 
anus) assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the 
brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some 
others ; and when he had formulated an accusation against them as breakers 
of the law, he delivered them to be stoned." (Jos., Antiq. Jews, Bk. XX, ix, 

Bishop Eusebius cannot pass over this chance to turn another Jew- 
ish testimony for his Christ ; he says that "The wiser part of the Jews 
were of the opinion that this (the killing of James) was the cause 
of the immediate siege of Jerusalem . . . Josephus also has not hesi- 
tated to superadd his testimony in his works. 'These things,' he says, 
'happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was the brother 
of him that is called Christ, and whom the Jews had slain, notwith- 
standing his preeminent justice. 5 " (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Bk. II, 
ch. 23.) 

The reader may judge of the integrity of these pretended Jewish 
testimonies to the Baptist and to the brother of the Christ, both 
suspicious per $e, and both falsely cited by Father Origen, who in all 
this could not find the famous section 3, first found a century later by 
Bishop Eusebius ; and which Origen makes it positive Josephus had 
not written and could not have written. Is it a violent suspicion, and 
uncharitable, to -suggest that the holy Bishop who forged the Letter 
of his Christ, and lied about finding it in the Edessa archives, really 
"found," in the sense of invented, or forged, the Josephus passages 
first heard of in his Church History? 

But Bishop Eusebius, with a sort of "stop thief" forethought, 


himself imputes forgery to those who would question or discredit his 
own pious inventions, while with unctuous fervor of pretended truth he 
appeals to the wonderful "testimonies of Josephus," which he has just 
fabricated. After quoting and misquoting Josephus with respect to 
John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, he thus solemnly vouches for their 
false witness : "When such testimony as this is transmitted to us by an 
historian who sprung from the Hebrews themselves, both respecting 
John the Baptist and our Saviour, what subterfuge can be left, to 
prevent those from being convicted destitute of all shame, who have 
forged the acts against them?" (Eusebius, HE. I, xi.) The Bishop 
justly pronounces his own condemnation. This, says Gibbon, "is an 
example of no vulgar forgery." (Chap, xvi.) In view of the convicting 
circumstances, and of his notoriously bad record, it is not unchari- 
table to impute this Josephus forgery to Bishop Eusebius. 


Another story of Pagan superstition related by Josephus, and 
twisted by the Christian invention of Bishop Eusebius and the sacred 
writers of Acts into inspired "history" and truth of God, is the cele- 
brated angel-owl passage relating to the tragic death of the King, 
Herod Agrippa, Josephus tells that Herod went to Csesarea to attend 
a celebration in honor of Caesar ; that as Herod entered the stadium, 
clad in a robe of silver tissue, the rays of the sun shone upon it re- 
splendently, making him look like a supernatural being ; whereupon the 
crowd cried out hailing him as more than mortal, as a god ; but his 
mortality was quickly made evident by his sudden illness and death. 
It may be explained that the word "angel" (Greek, angelos) means 
simply "messenger" or herald. Thus proceeds Josephus : 

"But as he [Herod] presently afterward looked up, he saw an owl sit- 
ting upon a certain rope over Ms head, and immediately understood that 
this bird was a messenger [Gr. angelo&] of ill-tidings." Herod was shortly 
seized with "severe pains in his belly/' and died after five days of suffer- 
ing." (Jos. Antiq. Jews, XIX, viii, 2.) 

This was too Paganish and prosaic for the pious Christian fancy 
of Bishop Eusebius ; so while he was forging the "Jesus passage," he 
proceeded to give Christian embellishment for edification to the "owl" 



story, with its use of the word "angelos." So he quotes in full the nar- 
ration of Josephus, under the chapter heading "Herod Agrippa 
persecuting the Apostles, immediately experienced divine Judgment." 
He first relates the "martyrdom of James" by Herod, and the im- 
prisonment of Peter, as recorded in Acts, and proceeds : "The conse- 
quences, however, of the king's attempts against the apostles, were not 
long deferred, but the avenging minister of divine justice soon over- 
took him. ... As it is also recorded in the book of Acts, he proceeded 
to Caesarea, and there on a noted festival, being clad in a splendid 
and royal dress, he harangued the people. . . . The whole people 
applauding him for his harangue, as it were the voice of a god, and not 
of a man, the Scriptures relate, 'that the angel of the Lord immedi- 
ately smote him, and being consumed by worms, he gave up the ghost.' 
Jt is wonderful to observe, likewise, in this singular event, the coinci- 
dence of the history given by Josephus, with that of the sacred 
Scriptures. In this he [Josephus] plainly adds his testimony to the 
truth, in the nineteenth book of his Antiquities, where he relates the 
miracles in the following words : [here quoting Josephus in full, until 
he reaches the owl-story, when he thus falsifies] : ' After a little 
while, raising himself, he saw an angel [angelos] hanging over his 
head upon a rope, and this he knew immediately to be an omen 
of evil'! Thus far Josephus: in which statement, as in others, I 
can but admire his agreement with the divine Scriptures" ! (Eusebius, 
HE. II, x.) An angel hanging on a rope over one's head might 
well have been taken by a superstitious person as ominous of some- 
thing maybe of a hung angel. This pious story, with the owl piously 
metamorphosed into an angel, was apparently cribbed from Josephus 
also by the writer of Acts, or maybe "interpolated" into it by 
the fanciful Bishop. There we find this Pagan-Jewish anecdote re- 
told by divine inspiration, thus embellished over Josephus and 
Eusebius: "And immediately the angel of the Lord [Gr. angelos 
Euriou] smote him, because he gave not God the glory : and he was 
eaten of worms and gave up the ghost" ! (Acts xii, 20-23.) Note the 
almost identical words, except for the progressive embellishments : 
Josephus' owl thus became first an angel of evil omen, then the aveng- 
ing minister of the wrath of God, aided by devouring worms to give 
true Christian zest and spite to the simple Pagan superstition. Herod 


probably died from acute indigestion caused by the excesses of the 
festivities, or from an attack of peritonitis or appendicitis. Profane 
history of the event does not chronicle the devouring, avenging worms 
of God. 

The forgery of pious documents of every imaginable character was 
among the most constant and zealous activities of the holy propagan- 
dists of the Christian Faith, from the beginning to the critical era when 
forgeries were no longer possible or profitable. A fitting close to this 
review is the following omnibus confession the Churches cheating 
each other by forgeries : 

"Indeed, in later times, we hear of recovered autographs of Apostolic 
writings in the controversies about the Apostolic origin of some Churches 
or about claims for metropolitan dignity. So the autograph of the Gospel 
of St. Matthew was said to have been found in Cyprus. . . . Eusebius 
(Hist. Eccles. vii, 19) relates that in his time the seat of St. James was as 
yet extant in Jerusalem. Of old pictures of Apostles, see Eusebius, ibid, 
vii, 18. Whether or not even the oldest of these statements are historically 
true remains still a mooted question. We regard it as useless to record what 
may be found on these topics in the vast amount of matter that makes up 
the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles and other legendary documents." (CE* 
i, 635.) 

Among some of these not already mentioned are found "The Gospel 
of Our Lord Jesus Christ, The Canons of Pseudo-Hippolytus, The 
Egyptian Church Ordinance." (CE. i, 636.) Also: "In the last years 
of the fifth century a famous document attributed to Popes Gelasius 
and Hormisdas adds ... a list of books disapproved, the works of 
heretics, and -forged Scriptural documents." (CE. vi, 4.) A glance at 
the Index-volume of CE. reveals the numerous forged works attributed 
to many of the Fathers of the early Church, listed under the word 
PsezuJo, or false, which word is to be understood as prefixed to each of 
the following names : Pseudo-Mqain, Ambrosius, Antoninus, Areop- 
agite, Athanasius, Augustine, Barnabas, CalHsthenes, Chrysostom, 
Clement, Epiphanius, Gelasius, Gregory Nazianzen, Hegesippus, 
Hippolytus, Ignatius, Isidore, Jonathan, Justin, Matthew, Prochorus, 
Tertullian, Zacharius. The pious ignorant "Christians, who for the 
most part are untrained and illiterate persons," as shown in the 



Octavius of Minucius Felix (v, xi), and the whole Church, were gulled 
by these frauds for a thousand years. 

Before looking into the forgery of the New Testament Books, we 
shall first draw, from their own words, cameo pen-sketches of those 
great men of 'God and of Holy Church, who under the fond name of 
Fathers, but with the minds and devious ways of little children, forged 
the sacred documents of the Faith, and by their pious labors of fraud 
and forgery founded what is credulously called the Church of Christ 
and the Most Holy Christian Faith. 



"The greater Saint, the greater Liar." Diegesis. 

"The principal historians of the patristic period cannot always be com- 
pletely trusted." (CE. vi, 14.) 

EMBRACED WITHIN CE.'s confession of patristic untrustworthines& 
and perversion of truth is every "Father" and Founder of the 
Church of Christ of the first three centuries of the fabrication of 
the new Faith, as by their own words will now be demonstrated. Yet 
upon these self -same not-to-be-trusted fabulists and forgers do the 
truth and validity of the Christ and the Christian religion solely and 
altogether depend. They destroy it. 

The Fathers of our country, f ramers of our Constitution and form 
of government, were men of personal honor and of public probity ; the 
most of them were Infidels. The "Fathers" and founders of the Chris- 
tian religion and Church of Christ were, all of them, ex-Pagan charla- 
tans "we who formerly used magical arts," as Father Justin Martyr 
admits (I Apology ', xiv) , who took up the new Christian superstition 
and continued to ply the same old magical arts under a new veneer, 
upon the ignorant and superstitious pagans and near-pagans, as the 
ensuing pages will demonstrate. The Fathers will show themselves to 
be wholly destitute of common sense of opinion and of common honesty 
of statement, credulous and mendacious to the w-th degree. 

It is of capital importance to an intelligent and adequate under- 
standing of the Christian religion, of which these Fathers were the 
originators and propagandists, to see their work in the making, and to 
know the mental and moral limitations and obliquities of these fatuous, 
fabling, forging Fathers of the Church. We shall see them to be gro- 
tesquely credulous of every fable, many of which themselves fabri- 
cated ; reckless of truth to the highest degree ; fluent and unscrupulous 



"traditions"] of the second century, rather than an example of his- 
torical narrative." (CE. vii, 341.) 

Tradition is popular stories and hand-me-down reports or gossip 
current in the community or passing current among any particular 
class of people ; it is of the same stuff as legend is made of. One pious 
Father or propagator of the Faith would aver some wonder-tale which 
would attract credulous interest ; the next, in repeating it, invariably 
embroiders it with new fancies, and so it grows like a snowball of fables. 
We have seen the example of the garnishments of the Fathers to the 
forged Aristeas-tale regarding the Septuagint; we shall see the 
Fatherly "traditions 55 suddenly crop up a century or two after some 
alleged event, embroider and expand and contradict themselves 
from Father to Father in the telling, with respect to every single in- 
stance: Gospel-tales, forged "apocrypha" narratives, false founda- 
tions of churches, bishops, popes, apostolic successions. Thus the 
Fathers inflated their originally fictitious "traditions' 5 of this and 
that, and on such bases the New Testament and the Church of Christ 
arose. Of course, the credibility of any "tradition 55 or alleged fact 
depends wholly on the credit of the first narrator of it ; to all later 
repeaters it is purely hearsay, and gains no further credit from the 
number of those repeating the original tale. If a thing is a lie when 
first told, repetition ad infinitum cannot make it into a truth. 

In a note to one instance of patristic tradition recorded in the 
bulky collection, the editors of the ANF., to which we are indebted 
for most of what follows regarding these fatuous Fathers, make this 
sententious comment: "Hearsay at second-hand, and handed about 
among many, amounts to nothing as evidence. 55 And this is the com- 
ment of Father Bishop Eusebius, the first Church historian, on the 
"traditions 55 of good Father Bishop Papias, first of the sub-Apostolic 
Fathers : "These sayings [of Jesus Christ and apostles] consisted of 
a number of strange parables, and doctrines of our Saviour, which 
the authority of so venerable a person^ who had lived with the apostles, 
imposed on the Church as genuine." (Hist. Eccles. Bk. Ill, ch. 39.) 
But this is simply another fictitious "tradition, 55 that Papias "lived 
with the apostles, 55 for he did not, as his own words and CE. will dis- 
close when we come to sketch that pious fabulist of a Father. Such are 


patristic and ecclesiastical "traditions/* of which sufficient examples 
are yet to be noticed. 


There were Twelve Tribes of Israel ; and Moses, coming down from 
Sinai, appointed twelve young men "according to the twelve tribes of 
Israel" to sacrifice at the twelve phallic pillars which he set up to 
celebrate the giving of the Law. (Ex. xxiv, 4-5.) So "tradition" has 
it that Jesus appointed Twelve Apostles : "The number twelve was 
symbolical, corresponding to the twelve tribes of Israel" (EB. i, 264) ; 
but the whole story is fictitious, says EB. (iii, 2987) , with the soundest 
Scriptural basis for its conclusion. As this and many other fictional 
features of the Christ-biographies are fully examined in my 7$ It 
God's Word? (Chaps. XIII-XIV), I must refer to it for the confused 
"traditions" of the Twelve, for the purpose of showing their wholly 
fictitious character. 

After the same "symbolical" fashion the legendary "Seventy 
Elders of Israel," commanded by Yahveh and chosen by Moses (Num. 
xi, 16, 24), had their counterpart in the equally legendary "Seventy 
Disciples, whom also the Lord appointed" (Luke x, 1), and who 
furnished so many zealous missionaries and early church-founders, as 
their "records" pretend, and so many of which are by CE. declared to 
be fraudulent and forged. Bear in mind that the "Gospel" records, as 
we shall see, are anonymous forgeries of a century and more after the 
"traditional" events recorded; and the unreliable nature of "tradi- 
tion" is further illustrated. 

The probability if not assurance will appear the stronger, as we 
proceed with the Fathers and with the "sacred writings, 5 * that the Holy 
Twelve had no existence in the flesh, but their "cue" being taken from 
the Old Testament legends, they were mere names dramatis persona 
masks of the play, of "tradition," such as Shakespeare and all 
playwrights and fiction-writers create for the actors of their plays and 
works of admitted fiction. 

A very curious and challenging admission is made by CE. in speaK- 
ing of the noted forgeries, long regarded as inspired, of the "Pseudo- 



Dionysius the Areopagite," who "clave unto Paul" after his Mar's 
Hill harangue (Acts xvii, 34), and in whose name many precious 
forgeries "a series of famous writings" (CE. v, 13) were forged by 
pious Christians "at the very earliest in the latter half of the fifth 
century," and which were "of highest and universally acknowledged 
authority, both in the Western and in the Eastern Church, lasting 
until the beginning of the fifteenth century," followed by a "period of 
sharp conflict waged about their authenticity, begun by Laurentius 
Valla, and closing only within recent years." (CE. v, 15.) "Those 
writings," says CE. with more far-reaching suggestion than in- 
tended, "with intent to deceive, weave into their narrative certain 
fictitious personages, such as Peter, James, John, Timothy, Carpus, 
and others." (CE. vii, 345.) If these great Apostles and "pillars of 
the Faith" are "fictitious personages" in the long-revered but now 
admitted forgeries of Pseudo-Dionysius, by what token may they be 
any the less fictitious personages in the hundreds of other equally 
forged Christian writings which we shall notice, as also in the to-be- 
demonstrated forgeries of Gospels, Acts and Epistles, in which the 
identical personages, or dramatis persons, play their imaginary and 
self -contradictory roles, as we shall promptly see? For fifteen hundred 
years, and until "only within recent years,'* were the Dionysian 
forgeries tenaciously proclaimed as genuine by the Holy-Ghost- 
guided Church; may it not have been equally mis-guided as to the 
"authenticity" of its Gospels and other "sacred writings"? If, in the 
venerated "pseudo-Areopagite," the sainted Peter, Paul, John, et als. 9 
are admittedly "fictitious personages," how do they acquire the flesh 
and blood of actual persons in Gospels and Epistles ? We shall see. 

I. The Apostles 

Two of them, the principal, Peter and John, are described to be 
"anthropoi agrammatoi Jcai idiotai unlearned and ignorant men 55 
(Acts iv, 13) ; all Twelve were of the same type and well matched. 
They were variously picked up from among the humblest and most 
superstitious of the Galilee peasants, fishermen and laborers, "called" 
personally, we are told, by the Son of God, the proclaimed King-to-be 
of the Jews, to be his counsellors and associates in the establishment of 


his earthly and heavenly Kingdoms of Jews. As for the King-to-be 
and his prospective Court, a saddening and repellent portraiture is 
sketched in the inspired Biographies : though it is true, "The chronol- 
ogy of the birth of Christ and the subsequent Biblical events is most 
uncertain." (CE. vii, 419.) His parents and family regarded him as 
insane and sought to restrain him by force. (Mark iii, 21 ; cf . John x, 
20.) He and his Apostle-band toured Palestine with a retinue of bare- 
foot and unwashed peasant men and women, shocking polite people by 
their habits of not washing even their hands to eat when invited as 
guests, and by the violence of their language. These traits ran in his 
peasant family and relatives. His cousin, known as John the Baptist, 
was a desert dervish, unwashed and unshorn, who wore a leather loin- 
strap for clothes and whose regular diet was wild bumble-bee honey 
and raw grasshoppers. His own brother James was as unkempt and 
filthy as any Saint in the calendar ; of him Bishop Eusebius records : 
"James, the brother of the Lord, . . . a razor never came upon his head, 
he never anointed with oil, and never used a bath"! (HE. II, 23.) With 
the Master at their head, the Troupe wandered up and down the little 
land, proclaiming the immediate end of the world, playing havoc with 
the legions of devils who infested the peasantry, and preaching Hell 
and Damnation for all who would not heed their fanatical preachments. 


As for the Twelve, the hope of great reward was the inspiredly 
recorded motive of these peasants who left their petty crafts for hope 
of greater gain by following the lowly King-to-be. The zeal and greed 
for personal aggrandizement of the Chosen Twelve is constantly re- 
vealed throughout the inspired record. Hardly had the Holy Twelve 
gotten organized and into action, when the cunning and crafty Peter, 
spokesman for the craft, boldly came forward and advanced the itch- 
ing palm : "Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have 
forsaken all, and followed thee ; what shall we have therefore?' 9 (Matt, 
xix, 27.) And the Master came back splendidly with the Promise: 
"And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have 
followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit in the 
throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the 



twelve tribes of Israel" (Matt, xix, 28). But even these brilliant 
future rewards could not satisfy the greed of the Holy Ones, and led 
not to gratitude, but to greater greed and strife. 

The Mother of James and John, probably inspired by them, and 
zealous for their greater glory, came secretly with her two sons, to 
Jesus, "worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him" (Matt, 
xx, 20) ; and when Jesus asked her what it was, "she saith unto him, 
Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and 
the other on the left, in thy Kingdom." (v. 21.) But Mark contradicts 
the assurance of Matthew that it was Mrs. Zebedee who came and made 
the request, and avers that "James and John, the sons of Zebedee, 
come unto him, saying, Master, we would that thou shouldst do for us 
whatsoever we shall desire," and stated their own modest demand for 
preferment. (Markx, 35-37.) But, in either contradictory event, both 
agree that "when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation 
against the two brethren." (Matt, xxix, 24 ; Mark x, 41.) 

Not during the whole one- or three-years of association with their 
Master, did these holy Apostles abate their greed and strife. Several 
times are recorded disputes among them as to "who should be greatest 
among them" (Matt, xviii, 1 ; Mark ix, 33-34 ; Luke ix ? 46) here 
again the "harmony of the Gospels" assuring the constant inharmony 
of the Apostles. And even at the Last Supper, when Jesus had an- 
nounced that one of them would that night betray him to death, "there 
was also strife among them, which of them should be accounted the 
greatest." (Luke xxii, 24.) And great was the disgust of the Master at 
his miserable Apostles, and especially at the craven and crafty Peter. 
Jesus had spurned him with blasting scorn, "and said unto Peter, 
Get thee behind me, Satan : thou art an offense to me" (Matt, xvi, 23) ; 
and again the Gospels are in Harmony (Mt. xvi, 23; Mk. viii, 33). 
Such are the Holy Apostles of Jesus Christ, said to be painted by some 
of themselves through inspiration. This "Satan" Peter, later consti- 
tuted "Saint" Peter, shall again deserve our attention. 

II. The Apostolic Fathers 

Under this rubric CE. lists, as those who were "converted with 
the apostles," and, after them, were the first propagandists of the 


Truth, the Catholic Saints Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas, 
and Hermas ; they fill up the first half of the second century of the era. 
The "traditions" preserved of these saintly Fathers of the Church are 
very scanty and dubious ; but from what exists they were all within 
the apostolic description of Peter and John, "ignorant and unlearned 
men," and like Bishop Papias, as described by Bishop Eusebius, "men 
of very small minds, if we may judge from their own words," of which 
we shall now read for ourselves. It will be noted that all these Fathers, 
like all the sub-apostolic Fathers for the first two centuries and more, 
were ex-Pagans, and (with the alleged exception of "Pope" Clement), 
were Greeks of scattered parts of the Empire, who wrote and taught 
in Greek, and with the very questionable exception of Clement, had 
nothing to do with "the Church which sojourns at Rome." Each was 
the Bishop and head of his own local, and independent, Church ; and 
never once does one of them (except Clement of Rome, in a forged 
Epistle) , speak of or mention the Church of Rome, or more than barely 
mention Peter (and only as one of the Apostles) , nor mention or quote 
a single book of the New Testament, though they are profuse in 
quoting the Old Testament books, canonical and apocryphal, the 
Pagan gods, and the Sibylline oracles, as inspired testimonies of 
Jesus Christ. The significance of all this will appear. 

1. CLEMENT OF ROME (about 30-96 A. D.). He is alleged to 
be the first, second, third, or fourth, Bishop, or Pope, of Rome (CE. 
iv, 13) ; and to be the author of two Epistles to the Corinthians, be- 
sides other bulky and important forgeries, thus confessed and cata- 
logued by CE: 

"Many writings have been falsely attributed to Pope St. Clement: (1) 
The 'Second Clementine Epistle to the Corinthians,' Many critics have 
.believed them genuine [they having been read in the Churches]. . . . But 
it is now admitted on all hands that they cannot be by the same author as 
the genuine [?] Epistle to the Corinthians. ... (2) Two 'Epistles to 
Virgins/ (3) At the head of the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals stand five let- 
ters attributed to St. Clement. (4?) Ascribed to Clement are the 'Apostolic 
Constitutions/ 'Apostolic Canons/ and the 'Testament of our Lord.' (5) 
The 'Clementines' or 'Pseudo-Clementines,' including the Recognitions and 
Homilies" hereafter to be noticed. (CE. iv, 14-15; cf. 17, 39.) 

The second of these alleged Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians 



is thus admittedly a forgery, together with everything else in his name 
but the alleged First Epistle. The case for this First Epistle is little 
if any better ; but as it is the very flimsy basis of one of the proudest 
claims of Holy Church though suppressed as "proof 5 * of another 
claim which it disproves, it is, as it were, plucked as a brand from the 
burning of all the other Clementine forgeries, and placed at the head 
of all the writings of the Fathers. Of this I Clement EB. says : "The 
author is certainly not Clement of Rome, whatever may be our judg- 
ment as to whether or not Clement was a bishop, a martyr, a disciple 
of the apostles. The martyrdom, set forth in untrustworthy Acts, has 
for its sole foundation the identification of Clement of Rome with 
Flavius Clement the'consul, who was executed by command of Domi- 
tian," A. D. 81-96. (EB. iii, 3486.) This First Epistle is supposed to 
have been written about the year 96-98, by Clement, friend and co- 
worker of Paul, according to the late "tradition" first set in motion 
by Dionysius, A. D. 170, But "This Clement," says C., after citing 
the Fathers, "was probably a Philippian." (CE. iv, 13.) "Who the 
Clement was to whom the writings were ascribed, cannot with absolute 
certainty be determined." (ANF. i, 2.) 

It is notable that the pretendedly genuine "First Epistle" does not 
contain or mention the name of any one as its author, nor name 
Clement ; its address is simply : "The Church of God which sojourns at 
Rome, to the Church of 'God sojourning at Corinth." There is only one 
MS. of it in existence, a translation into Latin from the original Greek. 
This is the celebrated MS. of "Holy Scripture" known as Codex A, 
which was discovered and presented to Charles I of England by Cyril of 
Alexandria, in 1628 ; the Fathers cited both I and II Clement as Scrip- 
ture. On this MS., at the end of I Clement, is written, "The First Epis- 
tle of Clement to the Corinthians" : a subscription which proves itself 
a forgery and that it was not written by Clement, who could not know 
that a later forger would write a "Second Clement," so as to give him 
occasion to call his own the First. (ANF. viii, 55-56.) 

By whomever this "First Epistle" was written, by Father, Bishop, 
or Pope of Rome, his zeal and his intelligence are demonstrated by his 
argument, in Chapter xxv, of the truth of the Resurrection ; in proof 
of which he makes this powerful and faith-compelling plea : 


"Let us consider that wonderful sign [of the resurrection] which takes 
place in Eastern lands, that is, in Arabia and the countries round about. 
There is a certain bird which is called a phoenix. This is the only one of its 
kind, and lives five hundred years. And when the time of its dissolution 
draws near that it must die, it builds itself a nest of frankincense, and 
myrrh, and other spices, into which, when the time is fulfilled, it enters and 
dies. But as the flesh decays a certain kind of worm is produced, which, 
being nourished by the juices of the dead bird, brings forth feathers. Then, 
when it has acquired strength, it takes up that nest in which are the bones 
of its parent, and bearing these it passes from the land of Arabia into 
Egypt, to the City called Heliopolis. And, in open day, flying in the sight 
of all men, it places them on the altar of the sun, and having done this, 
hastens back to its former abode* The priests then inspect the registers of 
the dates, and find that it has returned exactly as the 500th year was 
completed." (ANF. i, p. 12. Note: "This fable respecting the phoenix is 
mentioned by Herodotus (ii, 73) and by Pliny (Nat. Hist, x, 2), and is 
used as above by Tertullian (De Resurr., sec. 13), and by others of the 
Fathers." CE. iv, 15.) 

The occasion for the pretended writing of this Epistle, and the 
very high significance of it, will be noticed when we treat of the origin 
of the Church which sojourns at Rome. 

2. IGNATIUS : Saint, Bishop of Antioch (born in Syria, c. 50 
died rather latitudinously "between 98 and 117"). "More than one of 
the early ecclesiastical writers has given credence, though apparently 
without good reason, to the legend that Ignatius was the child whom 
the Saviour took up in his arms, as described in Mark, ix, 35." (CE. 
vii, 644.) "If we include St. Peter, Ignatius was the third Bishop of 
Antioch," (CE. vii, 644), thus casting doubt on another and a most 
monumental but confused Church "tradition." He was the subject of 
very extensive forgeries ; fifteen Epistles bear the name of Ignatius, 
including one to the Virgin Mary, and her reply ; two to the apostle 
John, others to the Philippians, Tarsians, Antiocheans, Ephesians, 
Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrneans, and to 
Poly carp, besides a forged Martyrvum; the clerical forgers were very; 
active with the name of Saint Ignatius. Of these, eight Epistles and the 
Martyrvum are confessedly forgeries ; "they are by common consent 
set aside as forgeries, which were at various dates and to ser've special 
purposes, put forth under the name of the celebrated Bishop of 



Antioch" (ANF. i, 46 ; CE. vii, 645) ; though, says CE., "if the Mar- 
tyrium is genuine, this work has been greatly interpolated." As to 
the seven supposed by some to be genuine, "even the genuine epistles 
were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of its 
author. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the 
original form" (CE. vii, 645) ; and even the authenticity of the 
"genuine seven" was warmly disputed for several centuries. The 
dubious best that CE. can say is : "Perhaps the best evidence for their 
authenticity is to be found in the letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, 
which mentions each of them by name . . . UNLESS, indeed, that of 
Polycarp itself be regarded as interpolated or FORGED." (16. p. 

As good proofs as may be that these "seven genuine" are late 
forgeries, are : of each one of them, as printed in the ANF., there are 
"two recensions, a shorter and a longer," printed in parallel columns, 
thus demonstrating that the longer at least is "greatly interpolated" ; 
the most significant being a reference to Peter and Paul, constituting 
the "interpolated" part of Chap, vii of the Epistle to the Romans, 
hereafter noticed. That as a whole they are late forgeries, is further 
proved by the fact, stated by Cardinal Newman, that "the whole 
system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered, at least in outline, not 
to say in parts filled up, in the course of his seven Epistles" (CE. vii, 
646) ; this including the impossibilities for that epoch of the 
elaborated hierarchy of the Imperial Church as having been insti- 
tuted by the humble Nazarene, who was to "come again" and put 
an end to all earthly things within the generation ; the infallibility of 
the Church, the supernatural virtue of virginity, and the primacy of 
the See of Rome, at the supposed time of Ignatius, a little horde of 
nondescripts burrowing in the Catacombs of imperial Rome! Oh, 
Church of God : never a scrap of paper even touched by you but was a 
loathsome forgery to the glory of your fictitious God and Christ ! So 
as Father Saint Ignatius did not write anything authentic, he escapes 
the self-condemnation of the other Apostolic Fathers, May his 
martyred remains rest in peace. 

3. POLYCARP: (69-155). Saint, Bishop of Smyrna, Martyr. 
Only one Epistle, addressed to the Philippians, remains of Polycarp, 
and of it CJE. discusses the "serious question" of its genuineness, which 


depends upon that of the Ignatian Epistles, and vice versa, above dis- 
cussed; it says: "If the former were forgeries, the latter, which sup- 
p.orts it might almost be said presupposes them, must 'be a forgery 
from the same hand." (CE. xii, 219.) Poor Church of God, cannot you 
produce something of your Saints that isn't a forgery? 

But if Saint Polycarp did not write anything genuine, his Church 
of Smyrna did itself proud in doing honor to his pretended Martyr- 
dom, in A. D. 154-5, or 165-6 (76.) so exact is Church "tradition." 
In one of the earliest Encyclicals (not issued by a Pope) the 
wondrous tale is told. It is addressed : "The Church of God which so- 
journs at Smyrna, to the Church of God sojourning in Philomelium, 
and to all the congregations of the Holy and Catholic [first use of 
term] Church in every place" ; and proceeds in glowing words to 
recount the virtues, capture, trial and condemnation to death by fire, 
of the holy St. Polycarp. Just before his capture, Polycarp dreamed 
that his pillow was afire ; he exclaimed to those around, "prophetically, 
4 I am to be burned alive,' " The forged and fabling Epistle proceeds : 
"Now, as Polycarp was entering into the stadium, there came to him 
a voice from heaven, saying, 'Be strong, and show thyself a man, 
Polycarp. 9 No one saw who it was that spoke to him ; but those of our 
brethren who were present heard the voice" (Ch. ix). Then the details 
of his trial before the magistrates, and the verbatim report of his 
prayer when led to his fate (xiv) . Then (Chap, xv) : 

"When he had pronounced this amen, and so finished his prayer, those 
who were appointed for the purpose kindled the fire. And as the flame 
blazed forth in great fury, we, to whom it was given to witness it, beheld 
a great miracle, and have been preserved that we might report to others 
what then took place. For the fire, shaping itself into the form of an arch, 
like the sail of a ship when filled with the wind, encompassed as by a circle 
of fire the body of the martyr. And he appeared within not like flesh which 
is burnt, but as bread that is baked, or as gold and silver glowing in a 
furnace. Moreover, we perceived such a sweet odor (coming from the pile), 
as if frankincense or some such precious spices had been smoking there. 
(Ch. xvi.) At length, when those wicked men perceived that his body could 
not be consumed by the fire, they commanded an executioner to go near 
and pierce him through with a dagger. And on his doing this, there came 
forth a dove, and a great quantity of blood, so that the fire was extin- 
guished" ! (Letter of the Church at Smyrna, ANF. i. 39-44 ; CE. xii, 221.) 



Even this holy Encyclical, at least as to its appended date, is not 
without suspicion ; for, "The possibility remains that the subscription 
was tampered with by a later hand. But 155 mu^st 'be approximately 
correct." (CE. xii, 221.) Oh, for something saintly above suspicion! 

4. BARNABAS : (no dates given) : Saint, a Jew ; styled an Apostle, 
and variously a Bishop, and wholly "traditional." "Though nothing is 
recorded of Barnabas for some years, he evidently acquired a high 
position in the Church"; for "a rather late tradition recorded by 
Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius [over 200 years later] says 
he was one of the Seventy Disciples ; but Acts (iv, 36-37)" indicates 
the contrary. "Various traditions represent him as the first Bishop 
of Milan, as preaching at Alexandria and at Rome, whose fourth 
Bishop, St. Clement, he is said to have converted, and as having suf- 
fered martyrdom in Cyprus. The traditions are all late and untrust- 
worthy. He is credited by Tertullian (probably falsely) with the 
authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the so-called Epistle 
attributed to him." (CE. ii, 300, 301.) Saint Barnabas, or his clerical 
counterfeiter, had some queer notions of natural history. Expounding 
the reasons why Moses banned certain animals as- "unclean" and unfit 
for "Kosher" food, the Saintly writer says : that Moses banned the 
hare, "Because the hare multiplies, year by year, the places of its 
conception ; for as many years as it lives, so many it has" ; and the 
hyena, "Wherefore? Because that animal annually changes its sex, 
and is at one time male, and at another female" ; and the weasel, "For 
this animal conceives by the mouth." ( Epist. Barnabas, Ch. x ; ANF. 
i, 143.) Perhaps from this, other holy Fathers derived the analogous 
idea, to save the rather imperiled virginity of "the proliferous but ever 
Virgin mother of God," Mary, that she "per aurem concepit con- 
ceived through her ear" as sung in the sacred Hymn of the Church: 

"Gaude Virgo, mater Christi, 
Quae per aurem concepisti, 
Gabriele nuntio." 
(Lecky, Rationalism in Europe, I, p. 212.) 

Thus we have, in CE. (supra) several Fathers imputed as liars, and 
a suspicion suggested as to Paul's inspired Epistle to the Hebrews 


(which is another forgery), and the admission of a forged Epistle of 
Saint Barnabas. Poor Church of Christ ! 

5. HERMAS : Saint, Martyr, seems to have missed being Bishop, 
"first or second century," though the Church Saint record is so con- 
fused that I cannot vouch whether this one is the reputed author of the 
forged Epistle of Barnabas. But "in the lists of the Seventy Apostles 
by the Pseudo-'DoTetheus and the Pseudo-UippoljtvLs [two more 
forgeries], Hermas figures as Bishop of PhilippL No one any longer 
supposes that he was the author of the Shepherd of Hermas, the date 
of which is about 40 A. D., though from Origen onwards Church-writers 
have expressed this view, and accordingly have given that allegorical 
work a place among the writings of the apostolic Fathers." ( EB. ii, 
2021 ; cf. CE. vii, 268.) The latter says that this "work had great 
authority in ancient times and was ranked with Holy Scripture" and 
included as such in the MSS. of Holy Writ ; tut it is called "apocry- 
phal and false," like everything else the Holy Church has ever had 
for "Scripture" or for self-aggrandizement. The pious author quotes 
the quaint forged Eldad and Medad as Scripture, and the Pagan 
Sibyls as inspired Oracles of God. 

HI. The Sub-Apostolic Fathers 

6. PAPIAS: (about 70-155 A. D.); Bishop of Hieropolis, in 
Phrygia, of whose "life nothing is known" (CE. xi, 459) ; who, after 
the Apostles and contemporary with the early Presbyters, was the first 
of the sub- Apostolic Fathers. He was an ex-Pagan Greek, who flour- 
ished as a Christian Father and Bishop during the first half of the 
second Christian century ; the dates of his birth and death are un- 
known. He is said to have written five Books entitled "Expositions of 
the Oracles of the Lord," that is, of the Old Testament "prophe- 
cies" ; these are now lost, "except a few precious fragments" (CE. vi, 
5), whether fortunately or otherwise may be judged from the scanty 
"precious fragments" preserved in quotations by some of the other Fa- 
thers. According to Bishop Eusebius (HE. iii, 39), quoted by CE. (xi, 
549), "Papias was a man of very small mind, if we may judge by his 
own words" ; though again he calls him "a man well skilled in all man- 
ner of learning, and well acquainted with the [0. T.] Scriptures." 



. iv, 36.) As examples, Eusebius cites "a wild and extraordinary 
legend about Judas Iscariot attributed to Papias," wherein he says of 
Judas : "his body having swollen to such extent that he could not pass 
where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so 
that his bowels gushed out." (ANF. i, 153.) This Papian "tradition" 
of course impeaches both of the other contradictory Scriptural tradi- 
tions of Judas, towit, that "he went and hanged himself" (Matt, xxvii, 
5), and Peter's alleged statement that "falling headlong, he burst 
asunder in the midst and all his bowels gushed out." (Acts i, 15-18.) 
Bishop Eusebius says that Bishop Papias states that "those who were 
raised to life by Christ lived on until the age of Trajan," Roman 
Emperor from 98-117 A. D. Father Papias falls into what would by 
the Orthodox be regarded as "some" error, in disbelieving and denying 
the early crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ evidently not 
then a belief ; for he assures us, on the authority of what "the disciples 
of the Lord used to say in the old days," that Jesus Christ lived to be 
an old man ; and so evidently died in peace in the bosom of his family, 
as we shall see explicitly confessed by Bishop Irenseus. Father Papias 
relates the raising to life of the mother of Manai'mos ; also the drinking 
of poison without harm by Justus Barsabas; which fables he sup- 
ported by "strange parables of the Saviour and teachings of his, and 
other mythical matters," says Bishop Eusebius (quoted by CJ5J.), 
"which the authority of so venerable a person, who had lived with the 
Apostles, imposed upon the Church as genuine." (Eusebius, Hist. 
Eccles. Bk. Ill, ch. 39.) But Father Papias this is important to 
remember is either misunderstood or misrepresented, in his claim to 
have known the Apostles, or at least the Apostle John ; for, says CE. 9 
in harmony with EB. and other authorities : "It is admitted that he 
could not have known many Apostles. . . . Irenaeus and Eusebius, 
who had the works of Papias before them, understood the presbyters 
not to be Apostles, but disciples of disciples of the Lord, or even 
disciples of disciples of the Apostles," (CE. xi, 458 ; see Euseb. HE. 
Ill, 39.) This fact Papias himself admits, that he got his "apostolic" 
lore at second and third hand : "If, then, any one who had attended on 
the elders came, I asked minutely after their sayings, what Andrew 
or Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, 
or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the Lord's disciples : 


which things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the 
Lord, say. For I imagined that what was to be got from books was 
not so profitable to me as what came from the living and abiding 
voice." (Papias, Frag. 4 ; ANF. i, 153.) 

One of the "wild and mythical matters" which good Father Papias 
relates of Jesus Christ, which is a first-rate measure of the degree of 
his claimed intimacy with John the Evangelist, and of the value of his 
pretended testimony to the "Gospels" of Matthew and Mart, to be 
later noticed, is the "curious prophecy of the miraculous vintage in the 
Millennium which he attributes to Jesus Christ," as described and 
quoted by CE. In this, Papias assures us, on the authority of his ad- 
mirer Bishop Irenseus, that he "had immediately learned from the 
Evangelist St. John himself," that : "the Lord taught and said, That 
the days shall come in which vines shall spring up, each having 10,000 
branches, and in each branch shall be 10,000 arms, and on each arm of 
a branch 10,000 tendrils, and on each tendril 10,000 bunches, and on 
each bunch 10,000 grapes, and each grape, on being pressed, shall 
yield five and twenty gallons of wine ; and when any one of the Saints 
shall take hold of one of these bunches, another shall cry out, *I am a 
better bunch, take me, and bless the Lord by me.' " The same infi- 
nitely pious twaddle of multiplication by 10,000 is continued by 
Father Papias with respect to grains of wheat, apples, fruits, flowers, 
and animals, precisely like the string of jingles in the nursery tale 
of The House that Jack Bwlt; even Jesus got tired of such his own 
alleged inanities and concluded by saying: "And those things are 
believable by all believers; but the traitor Judas, not believing, asked 
him, 'But how shall these things that shall propagate thus be brought 
to an end by the Lord?' And the Lord answered him and said, 'Those 
who shall live in those times shall see. 5 " "This indicates," explains 
Bishop Irenaeus, who devotes a whole chapter to the repetition and 
elaboration of this Christ-yarn as "proof" of the meaning of Jesus, 
that he would drink of the fruit of the vine with his disciples in ,his 
father's Kingdom, "this indicates the large size and rich quality of 
the fruits." (CE. xi, 458; Iren. Adv. Ear. IV, xxxiii, 4; ANF. i, 
564.) How far less wild a myth, one may wonder, is this prolific propa- 
gation than that fabled by this same John the Evangelist in his sup- 
posed "Revelation," wherein he saw in heaven the River of Life pro- 



ceeding out of the Throne of God and of the Lamb, and "in the midst 
of the street of it, and on either side of the River, was there the Tree 
of Life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every 
month: and the leaves of the Tree were for the healing of the na- 
tions. 5 ' (Rev. xxii, 1, 2.) Verily, "out of the mouth of babes and suck- 
lings thou hast perfected praise" ! (Mt. xxi, 16.) 

7. JUSTIN MARTYR: (c. 100-165) : Saint, Martyr, a foremost 
Christian Apologist. A Gentile ex-Pagan of Samaria, turned Christian, 
and supposed to have suffered martyrdom in the reign of Marcus 
Aurelius, in whose name he forged a very preposterous rescript. His 
principal works, in Greek, are his two Apologies, the first addressed to 
the Emperor Antoninus Pius, whose reply he also forged ; the second 
to "the sacred Senate" of Rome ; his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, 
and his Hortatory Address to the Greeks. He describes himself and fel- 
low Christian Fathers as "we who formerly used magical arts." (7 
Apol. ch. xiv.) The burden of his arguments is Pagan "analogies" of 
Christianity, the contents of many of -his- chapters being indicated by 
their captions, as "The Demons Imitate Christian Doctrine,"* and 
"Heathen Analogies to Christian Doctrine," in chapters xiv and xv of 
his First Apology, and elsewhere. His whole faith in Christ and in 
Christianity, he declares, is confirmed by these heathen precedents and 
analogies : "Be well assured, then, Trypho, that I am established in the 
knowledge of and faith in the Scriptures by those counterfeits which 
he who is called the Devil is said to have performed among the Greeks ; 
just as some were wrought by the Magi in Egypt, and others by the 
false prophets in Elijah's days. For when they tell that Bacchus, son 
of Jupiter, was begotten by [ Jupiter's] intercourse with Semele, and 
that he was the discoverer of the vine ; and when they relate, that being 
torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven ; 
and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive 
that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch 
Jacob, and recorded by Moses? . . . And when he [the devil] brings 
forward JSsculapius as the raiser of the'dead and healer of -all diseases, 
may I not say in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies 
about Christ? . . . And when I hear that Perseus was begotten of 
a virgin, I understand' that the deceiving serpent counterfeited this 
also." (Dial, with Trypho, ch. Ixix; ANF. i, 283.) 


Father Justin accepts the heathen gods as genuine divine beings, 
but says they are only wicked demons who lead men astray ; and he 
says that these "evil demons, effecting apparitions of themselves, both 
defiled women and corrupted boys." (I ApoL ch. v, ch. liv, passim.) 
The devils "having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that 
the Christ was to come, . . . they put forward many to be called the 
sons of Jupiter, under the impression that they would be able to pro- 
duce in men the idea that the things which were said in regard to Christ 
were mere marvellous tales, like the things which were said by the 
poets. . . . The devils, accordingly, when they heard these prophetic 
words, said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and gave out that he 
was the discoverer of the vine"; and so through many twaddling 
chapters, repeating the argument with respect to Bellerophon and 
his horse Pegasus, of Perseus, of Hercules, of JEsculapius, etc., as 
"analogies" prophetic of baptism, sacraments, the eucharist, resur- 
rection, etc., etc. The Pagan myths and miracles are true; therefore 
like fables of the Christ are worthy of belief : "And when we say also 
that the Word, who is the first-born of God, was produced without 
sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified 
and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing dif- 
ferent from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons 
of Jupiter. . . . But as we have said above, wicked devils perpetrated 
these things. . . . And if we assert that the Word of God was born 
in a peculiar manner, different from ordinary generation, let this, as 
said above, be no extraordinary thing to you, who say that Mercury 
is the angelic word [Logos] of God. , . . And if we even affirm that 
He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept 
of Perseus. And in what we say that he made whole the lame, the 
paralytic, and those born blind, we seem to say what is very similar 
to the deeds said to have been done by JEsculapius." (I Apol., chs. 
xxi, xxii ; ANF. i, 170 ; cf . Add. ad Grac. ch. Ixix ; II. 233.) 

Father Justin also retails to the Emperor the old fable of Simon 
Magus and his magical miracles at Rome, and attributes it all to the 
work of the devils. For "the evil spirits, not being satisfied with saying, 
before Christ's appearance, that those who were said to be sons of 
Jupiter were bom of him, but after he appeared, . . . and when they 
learned how He had been foretold by the prophets, . . . put forward 



again other men, the Samaritans Simon and Menander, who did many 
mighty works by magic ; . . . and so greatly astonished the sacred 
Senate and people of the Romans that he was considered a god, and 
honored with a statue; . . . which statue was erected in the river 
Tiber, between the two bridges, and bore this inscription in the lan- 
guage of Rome: 'Simoni Deo Sancto To Simon the holy God" 
(I Apol. chs. xxvi, Ivi; ANF. i, 171, 182; cf. Iren. Adv. Hcer. ch. 
xxiii; ANF. i, 347-8; Euseb. HE. II, 13.) We have seen this much 
embroidered "tradition" myth exploded, and the statue discovered 
and deciphered, it being a simple private pious monument to a Pagan 

Father Justin in many chapters cites and appeals for Christian 
proofs to "The Testimony of the Sibyl," of Homer, of Sophocles, of 
Pythagoras, of Plato. (Add. ad Grcec. chs. 18-20; ANF. i, 279- 
280.) Of the Sibyl, so often quoted: "And you may in part learn the 
right religion from the ancient Sibyl, who by some kind of potent in- 
spiration teaches you, through her oracular predictions, truths which 
seem to be much akin to the teachings of the prophets. . . . Ye men 
of Greece, ... do ye henceforth give heed to the words of the Sibyl, 
. . . predicting, as she does in a clear and patent manner, the advent 
of our Saviour Jesus Christ, 55 quoting long verses of Christian-forged 
nonsense. (76. chs. 37-38; ANF. i, 288-289.) 

8. IRENJEUS (120-c. 200) Saint, Martyr, Bishop of Lyons; 
ex-Pagan of Smyrna, who emigrated to Gaul and became Bishop; 
"information of his life is- scarce, and [as usual] in some measure in- 
exact. . . . Nothing is known of the date of his death, which may 
have occurred at the end of the second or beginning of the third cen- 
tury. 5 ' (CE. vii, 130.) How then is it known that he was a Martyr? 
Of him Photius, ablest early critic in the Church, warns that in some 
of his* works "the purity of truth, with respect to ecclesiastical tradi- 
tioTis, is adulterated by his false and spurious readings" (Phot., 
Bibl. ch. cxx) ; though why this invidious distinction of Irenaeus 
among all the clerical corruptors of "tradition 55 is not clear. The 
only surviving work of Irenaeus in four prolific Books is his notable 
Adversus Hcereses, or, as was its full title, "A Refutation and Sub- 
version of Knowledge falsely so Called, 55 though he succeeds in 
falsely subverting no little real knowledge by his own idle fables. This 


work is called "one of the most precious remains of early Christian 
antiquity." Bishop St. Irenaeus quotes one apt sentiment from Homer, 
the precept of which he seems to approve, but which he and his Church 
confreres did not much put into practice : 

"Hateful to me that man as Hades* gates, 
Who one thing thinks, while he another states." 

(Iliad, ix, 312, 313; Adv. Haer. Ill, xxxiii, 3.) 


Most remarkable of the "heresies" attacked and refuted by Bishop 
Irenaeus, is one which had just gained currency in written form in 
the newly published "Gospels of Jesus Christ," in the form of the 
"tradition" that Jesus had been crucified to death early in the thirties 
of his life, after a preaching career of only about one year, according 
to three of the new Gospels, of about three years, according to the 
fourth. This is rankly false and fictitious, on the "tradition" of the 
real gospel and of all the Apostles, avows Bishop Irenaeus, like Bishop 
Papias earlier in the century ; and he boldly combated it as "heresy." 
It is not true, he asserts, that Jesus Christ died so early in life and 
after so brief a career. "How is it possible," he demands, "that the 
Lord preached for one year only?"; and on the quoted authority 
of John the Apostle himself, of "the true Gospel," and of "all the 
elders," the saintly Bishop urges the falsity and "heresy" of the Four 
Gospels on this crucial point. Textually, and with quite fanciful 
reasonments, he says that Jesus did not die so soon : 

"For he came to save all through means of Himself all, I say, who 
through Him are born again to God infants, and children, and boys, and 
youths, and old men. He therefore passed through every age, becoming 
an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants; a child for children,, thus 
sanctifying those who are of this age; a youth for youths, and thus sancti- 
fying them for the Lord. So likewise He was an old man for old men, that 
He might be a perfect Master for all, not merely as respects the setting 
forth of the truth, but also as regards age, sanctifying at the same time the 
aged also, and becoming an example to them likewise. Then, at last, He 
came on to death itself, that He might be 'the first-born from the dead.* 

"They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding 
that which is written, 'to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,' main- 


tain that he preached for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth 
month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful to their own disadvantage, 
destroying His work and robbing Him of that age which is both more nec- 
essary and more honourable than any other; that more advanced age, I 
mean, during which also, as a teacher, He excelled all others. . . . 

"Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that 
this extends onward to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from 
the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which 
our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as 
the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia 
with John, the disciple of the Lord, (affirming) that John conveyed to 
them that information. AND HE REMAINED AMONG THEM UP TO 
THE TIMES OF TRAJAN [Roman Emperor, A. D. 98-117]. Some of 
them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other Apostles also, and heard 
the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to [the validity of] 
the statement. Whom then should we rather believe?" (Iren. Adv. Hcer. 
Bk. II, ch. xxii, sees. 3, 4, 5;ANF. I, 391-2.) 

The Bishop's closing question is pertinent, and we shall come back 
to it in due course. 

Irenseus also v.ouches his belief in magic arts, repeating as true 
the fabulous stories of Simon Magus and his statue in the Tiber and 
the false recital of the inscription on it ; and as a professional heresy- 
hunter he falls upon Simon as the Father of Heresy : "Now this Simon 
of Samaria, from whom all heresies derive their origin. . . . The 
successor of this man was Menander, also a Samaritan by birth ; and 
he, too, was a perfect adept in the practice of magic." (Adv. Hcer. 

9. TERTULLIAN : Bishop of Carthage, in Africa ; ex-Pagan born 
about 160, died 220. He was "the first of the Latin theological writ- 
ers ; ... and the first witness to the existence of a Latin Bible . . . 
Tertullian's canon of the 0. T. included the deutero-canonical books 
[i. e. the forged apocrypha], . . . He also cites the Book of 
Henoch [Enoch] as inspired, . , . also recognizes IV Esdras and 
the Sibyl." (CE. xiv, 525.) 

He was the most violent diatribist of them all in promoting the 
Christian religion, but renounced Christianity after 200 and became 
equally violent in propagating the extravagant heresy of Montanus. 
In this recantation of faith he gave evidence that he was in error in 
his former complete acceptance of Christianity as the last word and 


irrevocable posture In revealed truth, and revealed his own errant 
credulity. In attacking the heretics before he became one, of the 
most preposterous sect, he thus formulates the assurance of the 
finality of Christian Faith: "One has succeeded in finding definite 
truth, when lie 'believes. . . After we have believed, search should 
cease." (Against Heresies, ch. xi; ANF. iii, 248.) Tertullian is noted 
for several declamations regarding the assurance of faith which have 
become famous, as they are fatuous : "Credo quia incredibilis est I 
believe because it is- unbelievable" ; and, like Paul's "I am become a 
fool in glorying," he vaunts thus his own folly : "Other matters for 
shame I find none which can prove me to be shameless in a good sense, 
and foolish in a happy one, by my own contempt for shame. The Son 
of God was crucified ; I am not ashamed [to believe it] because men 
must needs be ashamed of it. And the Son of God died ; it is by all 
means to be believed, because it is absurd. And He was buried and rose 
again ; the fact is certain because it is impossible." (De Carne Christi, 
ch. v; ANF. iii, 525.) Reasoning thus, or quite without reason 
Christians yet believe these confessed absurdities and impossibilities. 
Tertullian denounces the sin of theatre-going, and in this awful 
illustration he invokes his God to witness of one of his lies to God's 
glory : "We have the case of the woman the Lord Himself is witness 
who went to the theatre, and came back possessed. In the outcasting 
(exorcism), accordingly, when the unclean creature was upbraided 
with having dared to attack a believer, he firmly replied: 'And in 
truth I did most righteously, for I found her in my domain.' " (De 
Spectaculis, ch. xxvi ; ANF. iii, 90.) In one of his sumptuary diatribes 
on woman's dress yet a favorite theme of the Vicars of God, though 
nowadays the complaint is of nether brevity he warns and assures : 
"to us the Lord has, even by revelations, measured the space for the 
veil to extend over. For a certain sister of ours was thus addressed by 
an angel, beating her neck," and telling her that she had as well be 
"bare down to your loins'* as any elsewhere below the neck. (On the 
Veiling of Virgins, ch. xvii ; ANF. iv, 37.) And he expresses the clerical 
concept of women, saying that "females, subjected as they are through- 
out to men, bear in their front an honourable mark of their virginity." 
(J&. ch. x, p. 33.) The celibate Fathers all glorified the suppression of 
sex: "Marriage replenishes the earth, virginity fills Paradise," says 



St. Jerome. (Adv. Jovianum, I, IT^N^PNF. vi, 360.) The Fathers 
regarded Woman as did St. Chrysostom : "a necessary evil, a natural 
temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic peril, a deadly fascina- 
tion, and a painted ill !" Good Father Tertullian, in his Exhortation 
to Chastity, has chapters captioned : "Second Marriage a Species of 
Adultery," and "Marriage Itself Impugned as akin to Adultery." 
(On Chastity, chs. ix, x ; ANF. iv, 55.) 

Strongly, and upon what seems good physiological reason, he 
"denies the virginity of Mary, the mother of Christ, in partu, though 
he affirms it [oddly] ante parttm" (CE. xiv, 523.) Father Tertullian 
was strong in advocacy of virginity not alone feminine, but of the 
men, exclaiming, "So many men-virgins, so many voluntary eunuchs" 
(/&.). He commends with marked approval the fanatical incitation of 
the Christ to self-mutilation "for the kingdom of heaven's sake" (Mt. 
xix, ll), and avers that to this same cause was due Paul's much-corn- 
plained-of "thorn in the flesh," saying : "The Lord Himself opens the 
kingdoms of heaven to eunuchs, as being Himself a virgin ; to whom 
looking, the apostle [Paul] also for this reason gives the prefer- 
ence to continence (I Cor. vii, 1, 7, 37, 40). . . . 'Good, 9 he says, *it 
is for a man not to have contact with her, for nothing is contrary to 
good except evil.* " (On Monogamy, ch. iii; ANF. iv, 60.) For like 
reason it was, he assures, that Noah was ordered to take two of each 
animal into the ark, "for fear that even beasts should be born of 
adultery. . . . Even unclean birds were not allowed to enter with 
two females each." (Ib. ch. iv; p. 62.) Father Tertullian shares the 
fantastic notions of natural history stated by Bishop St. Barnabas ; 
in proof of the eternal renovation of all things, Tertullian says : "The 
serpent crawls into a cave and out of his skin, and uncoils himself 
in a new youth ; with his scales, his years, too, are repudiated. The 
hyena, if you observe, is of annual sex, alternately masculine and 
feminine. . . . The stag, feeding on the serpent, languishes from 
the effects of the poison into youth." (On the PaUitm, ch. iii; ANF. 
iv, 7.) Magic admirably supplements nature and medical remedies as 
cure for the scorpion's sting, assures Father Tertullian: "Among 
cures certain substances supplied by nature have very great efficacy ; 
magic also puts on some bandages." (Scorpiace, ch. i ; ANF. iii, 633.) 
Like all the credulous ex-Pagan Fathers of Christianity, Tertul- 


lian is a confirmed Sibyllist, and believes the forged Pagan oracles 
as inspired truth of God. Citing several of her "prophecies," he as- 
sures with confidence: "And the Sibyl is thus proved no liar." (Pal- 
Hum, ch. ii ; ANF. iv, 6.) 

Tertullian admits, in a tu quoque argument, that the Christians 
are sun-worshippers: "You [Pagans] say we worship the sun; so do 
you." (CE. xiv, 525 ; Ad. Nationes, xiii ; ANF. iii, 123.) He is in com- 
mon with the Fathers in the belief in magic and astrology, which since 
Christ, however, are turned into holier channels in token of His divin- 
ity: "But Magi and astrologers came from the East (Matt. ii). We 
know the mutual reliance of magic and astrology. The interpreters 
of the stars, then, were the first to announce Christ's birth, the first 
to present gifts. . . . Astrology now-a-days, forsooth, treats of 
Christ is the science of the stars of Christ ; not of Saturn, or of Mars. 
But, however, that science has been allowed until the Gospel, in order 
that after Christ's birth no one should thenceforward interpret any- 
one's nativity by the heaven." (On Idolatry, ch. ix ; ANF. iii, 65.) 

In common with all the Fathers, Tertullian appeals to the* Phoenix 
as proof supreme of the resurrection of the body. It will be noticed, 
that the modern false translators of our Bibles have slipped in another 
bit of falsification by suppressing the word "phoenix" in the passage 
quoted by Tertullian, and have substituted the word "palm-tree" 
to express the flourishing state of the righteous, as there depicted : 

"Then take a most complete and unassailable symbol of onr hope [of 
resurrection], subject alike to life and death. I refer to the bird which is 
peculiar to the East, famous for its singularity, marvelous from its pos- 
thumous life, which renews its life in a voluntary death; its dying day is 
its birthday, for on it it departs and returns: once more a, phoenix where 
just now there was none ; once more himself, but just now out of existence ; 
another, yet the same. What can be more express and more significant for 
our subject; or to what other thing can such a phenomenon bear witness? 
God even in His own Scripture says: 'The righteous shall flourish like the 
phoenix* [Greek Septuagint: DiJcoios os phcenix antheseij Ps'. xcii, 12]. 
Must men die once for all, while birds in Arabia are sure of a resurrection?" 
(Tert., On the Resurrection of the Flesh, ch. xiii; ANF. iii, 554.) 

Father Tertullian vouches, too, with the other Fathers, for the 
bogus official Report of Pilate to Caesar, and for Pilate's conversion 



to Christianity, saying: "All these things Pilate did to Christ; and 
now in fact a Christian in his own convictions, he sent word of Him to 
the reigning Caesar, who was at the time Tiberius. Yes, and even the 
Caesars would have believed on Christ, if either the Caesars had not 
been necessary for the world, or if Christians could have been 
Caesars." (Apol. ch. xxi; ANF. iii, 35.) Father Tertullian gives full 
credence to the fable of the Septuagint, and assures the Emperors : 
"To this day, at the temple of Serapis, the libraries of Ptolemy are 
to be seen, with the identical Hebrew originals in them." (Apology, 
to the Rulers of the Roman Empire, I, xviii; ANF. iii, 32.) And, as 
all the other Fathers, he gives full faith and credit to the Pagan gods 
as "effective witnesses for Christ" ; "Yes, and we shall prove that 
your own gods are effective witnesses for Christ. . . . Against the 
Greeks we urge that Orpheus, at Piera, Musaeus at Athens, (etc.) 
imposed religious rites. . . . Numa Pompilius laid on the Romans 
a heavy load of costly superstitions. Surely Christ, then, had a right 
to reveal Deity." (Apol ch. xxi ; ANF. iii, 36.) Like the other Fathers, 
Tertullian is also in the ranks of patristic forgers of holy fables, 
being either the author or the publisher of "The Passion of the Holy 
Martyrs Perpetua and Felicitas," the fabulous Martyrdom of two 
of the Church's most celebrated bogus Saints, annexed to his accred- 
ited works. (ANF. iii, 699-706.) 

10. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA : (c. 153-c. 215) . Ex-Pagan ; 
head of the catechetical school of Alexandria ; tutor of Origen. He 
wrote an Eaikortatlo to the Heathen, the Pcedagogus, or Instructor, 
and eight books called Stromata, or Miscellanies. From the latter a 
few random passages are taken which fully accredit him among the 
simple-minded and credulous Fathers of Christianity. 

Clement devotes ample chapters to showing the "Plagiarism by 
the Greeks of the Miracles related in the Sacred Books of the He- 
brews" ; he quotes as inspired the forged book "Peter's Preaching," 
and the heathen Sibyls and Hystaspes ; he assures us, with his reason 
therefor, that "The Apostles, following the Lord, preached the Gos- 
pel to those in Hades. For it was requisite, in my opinion, that as here, 
so also there, the rest of the disciples should be imitators of the 
Master." Abraham was a great scientist: "As then in astronomy we 
have Abraham as an instance, so also in arithmetic we have the same 

Abraham," the latter diploma being founded on the feat that Abra- 
ham, bearing that Lot had been taken captive, numbered his own 
servants, 318" ; this mystic number, expressed in Greek letters TIE, 
used as numerals : "the character representing 300 (T) is the Lord's 
sign (Cross), and I and E indicate the Saviour's name," et cetera* 
of cabalistic twaddle. (Strom. VI, xi; ANF, ii, 499.) Clement believes 
the heathen gods and the Sibyls, and all the demi-gods and myths of 
Greece : "We have also demonstrated Moses to be more ancient, not 
only than those called poets and wise men, but than most of their 
deities. Not alone he, but the Sibyl, is more ancient than Orpheus. . . . 
On her arrival at Delphi she sang: 

*O Delphians, ministers of far-darting Apollo, 
I come to declare the mind of JEgis-bearing Zeus^ 
Enraged as I am at my own brother Apollo/ " (Strom. ii> 325.) 

11. ORIGEN: born in Alexandria, Egypt, about 165; a wild 
fanatic, he made himself "a eunuch for the Kingdom of Heaven's 
sake"; died at Tyre or Csesarea about 254; was the first of the 
Fathers said to be born of Christian parents ; he was a pupil and 
protege of Clement of Alexandria. Origen was the greatest theologian 
and biblical scholar of the Church up to his time; he was the author 
of the famous Hexdpla, or comparative edition of the Bible in Hebrew, 
with Greek transliteration and the Greek texts of the Septuagint and 
other versions in six parallel columns. Origen was badly tainted with 
the Arian heresy which denied the divinity of Jesus Christ, and was 
deposed from the priesthood, but his deposition was not generally 
recognized by all the Churches, which again proves that they were 
not then subject to Rome. For sheer credulity and nonsense Father 
Origen was the peer of any of the Pagan-born Patriarchs of "the new 
Paganism called Christianity,' 5 as is evidenced by the following ex- 
tracts from his chief works. 

Accepting as living realities the heathen gods and their miracles, 
he argues that the Hebrews must have had genuine miracles because 
the heathens had many from their gods, which were, however, only 
devils ; that the Hebrews viewed "with contempt all those who were 
considered as gods by the heathen, as not being gods, but demons, 
Tor all the gods of the nations are demons' (Ps. xcvi, 5) N . '. . In 



the next place, miracles were performed in all countries, or at least 
in many of them, as Celsus himself admits, instancing the case of 
JEsculapius, who conferred benefits on many, and who foretold future 
events to entire cities," citing instances. If there had been no miracles 
among the Hebrews "they would immediately have gone over to the 
worship of those demons which gave oracles and performed cures." 
(Contra Celsum, III, ch. ii-iii; ANF. iv, 466.) The heathen oracles 
were indeed inspired and true, but were due to a loathsome form of 
demoniac inspiration, which he thus (with my own polite omissions) 
describes : 

"Let it be granted that the responses delivered by the Pythian and 
other oracles were not the utterances of false men who pretended to a di- 
vine inspiration ; but let us see if , after all, that they may be traced to wicked 
demons, to spirits which are at enmity with the 'human race. ... It is 
said of the Pythian priestess, that when she sat down at the mouth of the 
Castalian cave, the prophetic spirit of Apollo entered her private parts; 
and when she was filled with it, she gave utterance to responses which are 
regarded with awe as divine truths. Judge by this whether that spirit does 
not show its profane and impure nature/' (Contra Celsum, VII, iii; ANF. 
iv, 611-612). . . . "It is not, then, because Christians cast insults upon 
demons that they incur their revenge, but because they drive them away 
out of the images, and from the bodies and souls of men." (Ib. c. xliii, p. 

Father Origen clung to the pagan superstition that comets and 
new stars portend and herald great world-events, and urges that this 
undoubted fact gives credibility to the fabled Star of Bethlehem : "It 
has been observed that, on the occurrence of great events, and of 
mighty changes in terrestrial things, such stars are wont to appear, 
indicating either the removal of dynasties or the breaking out of 
wars, or the happening of such circumstances as may cause commo- 
tions upon the earth" why not then the Star of Bethlehem? (Contra 
Celsum, I, lix; ANF. iv, 422.) All the stars and heavenly bodies are 
living, rational beings, having souls, as he curiously proves by Job 
and Isaiah, as well as upon clerical reason : 

"Let us see what reason itself can discover respecting sun, moon, and 
stars. ... To arrive at a clearer understanding on these matters, we 
ought first to inquire whether it is allowable to suppose that they are living 


and rational beings; then, whether their souls came into existence at the 
same time with their bodies, or seem to be anterior to them; and also 
whether, after the end of the world, we are to understand that they are to 
be released from their bodies ; and whether, as we cease to live, so they 
also will cease from illuminating the world. . . . We think, then, that 
they may be designated as living beings, for this reason, that they are said 
to receive commandments from God, which is ordinarily the case only with 
rational beings: 'I have given commandments to all the stars' (Isa. xiv, 
12), says the Lord." (De Principiis, I, vii; ANF. iv, 263.) 

12. LACTANTIUS: (-P-330). Ex-Pagan, and eminent Christian 
author and defender of the faith. On account of his great reputation 
for learning, he was invited by the Emperor Constantine to become the 
tutor of his son Crispus, about 312318 A. D. Thus, omitting two en- 
tire volumes (V and VI) of the Fathers, we are brought to the begin- 
ning of Christianity as the official or state religion accredited yet 
by fables and propagated by superstitious myth. The great work of 
TLactantius, The Divine Institutes, dedicated to the Emperor, was 
thus addressed: "We now commence this work under the auspices of 
your name, mighty Emperor Constantine, who were the first of 
the Roman princes to repudiate errors, and to acknowledge and hon- 
our the majesty of the one and only true God." (I, i.) This work, in 
seven lengthy Books, occupies over 200 double-columns of vol. VII of 
the Ante-Nicene Fathers. 

Written for the purpose of confirming Constantine in his very un- 
certain "Christian" faith, and to appeal for conversion of the higher 
classes of the Pagans under the imperial favor, no work of the Fathers 
is more positive in the recognition of the Pagan gods as divine reali- 
ties, who are rather demons of very active malignity ; and none equalled 
him in profuse appeals to the Pagan gods and the Sibyls as their proph- 
etesses, as divine "testimonies" to Jesus Christ and virtually every 
natural and supernatural act attributed to him in the romantic Gos- 
pels. In fact, his whole work is a sort of digest of Pagan mythology 
taken as divinely true and inspired antecedents and evidences of the 
fictitious "f acts" of the new Paganism called Christianity. We have 
already noticed some of his. tributes to the Sibyls as prophecies of 
Jesus Christ; as it is impossible to cite but a few out of exceeding 
many, these are selected, demonstrating the origins of the heathen 



gods as actually demons ; the verity of their being, words and deeds, 
and that they one and all testify of Jesus Christ and the holy myster- 
ies of the Christian faith- In a word, Christianity is founded on and 
proved by Pagan myths. And first, of the demon-gods, for whom he 
thus vouches : 

"God in his forethought, lest the devil, to whom from the beginning He 
had given power over the earth, should by his subtility either corrupt or 
destroy men, . . . sent angels for the protection and improvement of the 
human race; and inasmuch as He had given these a free will, He enjoined 
them above all things not to defile themselves. . , . He plainly prohibited 
them from doing that which He knew that they would do, that they might 
entertain no hope of pardon. Therefore, while they abode among men, that 
most deceitful ruler of the earth . . . gradually enticed them to vices, and 
polluted them by intercourse with women. Then, not being admitted into 
heaven on account of the sins into which they had plunged themselves, they 
fell to the earth. Thus from angels the devil makes them to become his 
satellites and attendants. 

"But they who were born from these, because they were neither angels 
nor men, but bearing a kind of mixed nature, were not admitted into hell 
as their fathers were not into heaven. Thus there became two kinds of 
demons ; one of heaven, the other of the earth* Tlie latter are the evil spir- 
its, the authors of all the evils which are done, and the same devil is their 
prince. Whence Trismegistus calls him the ruler of demons. . . . They are 
called demons, that is, skilled and acquainted with matters ; for they think 
that these are gods. 

"They are acquainted, indeed, with many future events, but not all, since 
it is not permitted to them entirely to know the counsel of God. These 
contaminated and abandoned spirits, as I say, wander over the whole 
earth, and contrive a solace for their own perdition by the destruction of 
men. Therefore they fill every place with snares, frauds and errors; for 
they cling to individuals, and occupy whole houses from door to door. . . . 
And these, since spirits are without substance and not to be grasped, in- 
sinuate themselves into the bodies of men; and secretly working in their 
inward parts, they corrupt the health, hasten diseases, terrify their souls 
with dreams, harass their minds with phrenzies, that by these means they 
may compel men to have recourse to their aid/' (Lact* Divine Insiit. II, 
. vii,64.) 

He assures us, in chapter headings, and much detail of text : "That 
Demons have no Power over Those who are Established in the Faith" 
(Ch. xvi) ; "That Astrology, Soothsaying, and Similar Arts are the 


Inventions of Demons" (Ch. xvii). These demon-gods are the most 
potent witnesses to the Christian faith, and scores of times he cites 
and appeals to them. The Hermes Trismegistus so often quoted and 
vouched for, is the god Mercury "Thrice Greatest," and is the great- 
est of the Christian witnesses. In many chapters the "divine testi- 
monies" of Trismegistus, Apollo, and the other demon-gods, are 
confidently appealed to and their proofs recited. He proves the immor- 
tality of the soul and the resurrection of the dead by renewed appeals to 
Hermes, Apollo, and the Sibyl: "Of the Soul, and the Testimonies 
concerning its Eternity" (Ch. xiii). "And I will now allege the testi- 
mony of the prophets. . . . Hermes, describing the nature of man, 
that he might know that he was made by God, introduced this state- 
ment. . . . Let us therefore seek greater testimony. A certain Pol- 
ites asked Apollo of Miletus whether the soul remains after death or 
goes to dissolution; and he replied in these verses [quoting the re- 
sponse]. What do the Sibylline poems say? Do they not declare that 
this is so, when they say that the time will come when God will judge 
the living and the dead? whose authority we will hereafter bring 
forward. . . . Therefore the Son of the most high and mighty God 
shall come to judge the quick and the dead, as the Sibyl testifies and 
says [quoting]. . . . 'Dies irae, dies ilia, Teste David et Sibylla. 9 " 
(Ibid 9 VII, chs. xiii, xxii; ANF. vii, 210, 218.) 

Malignantly powerful as these demon-gods are, the simple but 
potent name of Christ, or the "immortal sign" of the Cross, on the 
instant renders them impotent and puts them to flight ; all the demon- 
gods may be evoked by magic, only Christ cannot be thus conjured. 

As for man here occurring the famous epigram Homo ex Tiumo : 
"He formed man out of > the dust of the ground, from which he was 
called man, because he was made from the earth. Finally Plato says 
that the human form was godlike; as does the Sibyl, who says, 
'Thou are my image, O man, possessed of right reason. 5 (16. II, 
Iviii ; p. 58.) Chapter vi is entitled, "Almighty God begat His Son ; 
and the Testimonies of the Sibyls and of Trismegistus concerning 
Him"; and he urges: "But that there is a Son of the Most High 
God is shown not only by the unanimous utterances of the prophets, 
but also by the declaration of Trismegistus and the predictions of 
the Sibyls [quoting them at length]. The Erythrean Sibyl proclaims 



the Son of God as the leader and commander of all [quoting], . . . 
And another Sibyl enjoins: 'Know him as your God, who is the Son 
of God'; and the Sibyl calls Him 'Counsellor.' " (/&. IV, vi; p. 105.) 


Treating at length of the prolific adoption and adaptation by "that 
new Paganism later called Christianity," of the terms, rites and cere- 
monies of Paganism, CE. says: "Always the Church has forcefully 
moulded words, and even concepts (as Saviour, Epiphany, Baptism, 
Illimination, Mysteries, Logos, to suit her own Dogma and its expres- 
sion. It was thus that John could take the [Pagan] expression 'Logos,' 
mould it to his Dogma, cut short all perilous speculation among Chris- 
tians, and assert once for all that the 'Word was made Flesh' and 
was Jesus Christ." (CE. xi, 392.) And thus Father Lactantius, ap- 
pealing to Pagan gods and Sibyls for cogent confirmation, deals with 
the ancient Pagan notion of the "Logos," converted now into a "re- 
vealed" and most holy Christian Mystery and the Son of God: 

"For though He was the Son of God from the beginning, He was born 
again a second time according to the flesh : and this two-fold birth of His 
has introduced great terror into the minds of men, and overspread with 
darkness even those who retained the mysteries of true religion. But we 
will show this plainly and clearly. . . . Unless by chance we shall pro- 
fanely imagine, as Orpheus supposed, that God is both male and female. 
. . . But Hermes also was of the same opinion, when he says that He was 
'His own father' and 'His own mother' [ 'self-father and self-mother*] .... 
John also thus taught: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was 
with God, and. the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with 
God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything 

"But the Greeks speak of Him as the Logos, more befittingly than we 
do as the word, or speech: for Logos signifies both speech and reason, in- 
asmuch as He is both the speech and reason of God. . . . Zeno represents 
the Logos as the arranger of the established order of things, and the f ramer 
of the universe. . . . For it is the spirit of God which he named the soul 
of Jupiter. For Trismegistus, who by some means or other searched into 
almost all truth, often describes the excellence and majesty of the Word." 
(Lact. Div. Inst. IV, viii-ix; ANF. vii, 106-7.) 


As there can be no more positive and convincing proof that the 
Christ was and is a Pagan Myth, the old Greek "Logos" of Hera- 
clitus and the Philosophers revamped by the Greek priest who wrote 
the first chapter of the "Gospel according to St. John" and worked 
up into the "Incarnate Son" of the old Hebrew God for Christian 
consumption as the most sacred Article of Christian Faith and The- 
ology? 1 a PP en d to the admission of Father Lactantius the culminat- 
ing evidences of the "Gospel" and the further confession of the Church 
through the Catholic Encyclopedia. The inspired "revelation" of the 
Holy Ghost concerning the holy Pagan doctrine of the "Creative 
Logos' 9 or "Word of God," made flesh in Jesus Christ, is thus "taken 
and moulded to his dogma" by the Holy Saint John : 

"In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and 
the Logos was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things 
were made by him [a. e. by the Logos\ ; and without him was not anything 
made that was made." (John, i, 1-3.) 

The doctrine of the Logos was a Pagan speculation or invention 
of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, who lived 535-475 Before 
Christ, and had never heard of Christ. From it the science of Logic 
takes its name ; and on it the first principle of Stoicism and the Chris- 
tian doctrine of "The Word" are based. If this startling statement 
out of secular history is questioned, let CE. bear its clerical witness 
to the Pagan origin of the Logos and the curious Christian metamor- 
phosis of it wrought by "St. John" and the Church Fathers : 

"The word Logos (Or. Logos; Lat. Verbum) is the term by which Chris- 
tian theology in the Greek language designates the Word of God, the Sec- 
ond Person of the Blessed Trinity. Before St. Jolin had consecrated this 
term by adopting it, the Greeks and the Jews had used it to express religious 
conceptions which, under divers titles, have exercised a certain influence 
on Christian theology. ... It was in Heraclitus that the theory of the 
Logos appears for the first time, and it is doubtless for this reason that, 
first among the Greek philosophers, Heraclitus was regarded by St. Justin 
(Apol. I, 46) as a Christian before Christ. ... It reappears in the writ- 
ings of the Stoics, and it is especially by them that this theory is developed. 
God, according to them, 'did not make the world as an artisan does his work 
[though Genesis ii says he did] but it is by wholly penetrating all mat- 



ter [thus a kind of ether] that He is the Demiurge of the universe/ He 
penetrates the world 'as honey does the honeycomb* (Tertullian, Adv. 
Hermogenenij 44). . . . This Logos is at the same time a force and a law 
[How, then, a Second Person Trinitarian God?]. . . . Conformably 
to their exegetical habit, the Stoics made of the different gods personifica- 
tions of the Logos, e. g. of Zeus- and above all of Hermes. ... In the 
[apocryphal] Book of Wisdom this personification is more directly im- 
plied, and a parallel is established between Wisdom and the Word. In 
Palestinian Rabbinism the Word (Memra) is very often mentioned. . . . 
It is the Memra of Jahveh which lives, speaks, and acts. . . . Philo's prob- 
lem was of the philosophical order ; God and man are infinitely distant from 
each other ; and it is necessary to establish between them the relations of 
action and of prayer; the Logos is here the intermediary. . . . Through- 
out so many diverse [Pagan and Jewish] concepts may be recognized a 
fundamental doctrine : the Logos is an intermediary between God and the 
world; through it God created the world and governs it; through it also 
men know God and pray to Him. . . . The term Logos is found only in 
the Johannine writings. . . . This resemblance [to the notion in the Book 
of Wisdom] suggests the way by which the doctrine of the Logos entered 
into Christian theology" (CE. ix, 328-9.) 

Thus confessedly is the Divine Revelation of the "Word made 
flesh" a Pagan-Jewish Myth, and the very Pagan Demiurge is the 
Christian Christ "Very God" and the "Second Person of the 
Blessed Trinity" ! Here is the evolution of a Pagan speculation into a 
Christian revelation: Heraclitus first devised "the theory of the 
Logos" ; by the Stoics "this theory is developed" into the Demiurge 
"at the same time a force and a law" which wrought the several 
works of creation instead of Zeus or Hermes. In the admittedly 
forged BooJc of Wisdom, which is nevertheless part of the inspired 
Canon of the Catholic Bible, the Pagan Demiurge becomes Divine 
Wisdom and "paralleled" with "the Word" of the Hebrew God, 
and "is the Memra of Jahveh which lives, speaks, acts." The Jewish 
philosopher Philo evolved it into "an intermediary [Mediator] 
between God and the world, through which God created the world." 
This Pagan notion echoes in: "There is one mediator between God 
and men, the man Christ Jesus." (1 Tim. ii, 5.) Then comes the 
Christian Greek priest who wrote the first chapter of "the Gospel 
according to John," and, Lo ! "the Logos [Word] was God. . . . All 
things were made by him" ! The Pagan speculation is first philoso- 


phized, then personified, then Deified into the "Second Person" of a 
Blessed Trinity which was first dogmatized in 381 A. D. ; and the 
blasphemy laws of England and a number of American States decree 
imprisonment for ridiculing this Most Holy Mystery of Christian 
Faith, Yet Christians decry the doctrine of Evolution and pass laws 
to outlaw teaching it. 

Having pursued these incontestable Pagan "proofs" through his 
seven Books, and so vindicated the truth and divinity of Christianity, 
the eminent Doctor Lactantius concludes with this strange apos- 
trophe to the near-Pagan Emperor, assuring him of the overthrow 
now of all error and the triumph of Catholic Truth : "But all fictions 
have now been hushed, Most Holy Emperor, since the time when the 
great God raised thee up for the restoration of the house of justice, 
and for the protection of the human race. . . . Since the truth now 
comes forth from obscurity, and is brought into light" ! (/&. VII, 
xxvi ; p. 131.) Father Lactantius then quite correctly, from a clerical 
viewpoint, defines truth and superstition, but oddly enough confuses 
and misapplies the terms so far as respects the Christian religion: 
"Truly religion is the cultivation of the truth, but superstition is 
that which is false. . . . But because the worshippers of the gods 
imagine themselves to be religious, though they are superstitious, 
they are neither able to distinguish religion from superstition, nor 
to express the meaning of the names." (76. IV, xxviii; p. 131.) 

13. AUGUSTINE (354-430): Bishop of Hippo, in Africa; 
"Saint, Doctor of the Church ; a philosophical and theological genius 
of the first order, dominating, like a pyramid, antiquity and the suc- 
ceeding ages. . . . Compared with the great philosophers of past 
centuries and modern times, he is the equal of them all ; among the- 
ologians he is undoubtedly the first, and such has been his influence 
that none of the Fathers, Scholastics, or Reformers has surpassed 
it." (CJB. ii, 84.) This fulsome paean of praise sung by the Church 
of its greatest Doctor, justifies a sketch of the fiery African Bishop 
and a look into his monumental work, De Civitate Dei "The City of 
God," written between the years 413-426 A. D. This will well enough 
show the quality of mind of the man, ,a monumentally superstitious 
and credulous Child of Faith ; and throw some light on the psychol- 
ogy of the Church which holds such a mind as its greatest Doctor, 


towering like a pyramid over the puny thinkers and philosophers of 
past centuries and of modern times. We may let CE. draw the bio- 
graphical sketch in its own words, simply abbreviated at places to 
save space. Augustine's father, Patricius, was a Pagan, his mother, 
Monica, a convert to Christianity; when Augustine was born "she 
had him signed with the cross and enrolled among the catechumens. 
Once, when very ill, he asked for baptism, but, all danger being passed, 
he deferred receiving the sacrament, thus yielding to a deplorable 
custom of the times." When sixteen years old he was sent to Car- 
thage for study to become a lawyer ; "Here he formed a sinful liason 
with the person who bore him a son (372) [Adeodatus, "the gift of 
God"] 'the son of his sin 5 an entanglement from which he only de- 
livered himself, at Milan, after fifteen years of its thralldom." During 
this time Augustine became an ardent heretic : "In this same year Au- 
gustine fell into the snares of the Manichaeans. . . . Once won over to 
this sect, Augustine devoted himself to it with all the ardor of his 
character ; he read all its books, adopted and defended all its opinions. 
His furious proselytism drew into error [several others named]. It 
was during this Manichaean period that Augustine's literary faculties 
reached their full development." . . . 

In 383 Augustine, at the age of twenty-nine, went to Italy, and 
came to Milan, where he met and fell under the influence of Bishop 
Ambrose [he who forged the Apostles' Creed]. "However, before 
embracing the Faith, Augustine underwent a three years* strug- 
gle. . . . But it was only a drearn ; his passions still enslaved him. 
Monica, who had joined her son at Milan, prevailed upon him [to 
abandon his mistress] ; and though he dismissed the mother of 
Adeodatus, her place was soon filled by another. At first he prayed, 
but without the sincere desire of being heard. [In his "Confessions" 
(viii, 17) he addresses God: "Lord, make me pure and chaste but 
not quite yet"! Finally he resolved to embrace Christianity and to 
believe as the Church believed.] The grand stroke of grace, at the 
age of thirty-three, smote him to the ground in the garden at Milan, 
in 386. . . . From 386 to 395 Augustine gradually became 
acquainted with the Christian doctrine, and in his mind the fusion of 
Platonic philosophy with revealed dogmas was taking place. ... So 
long, therefore, as his philosophy agrees with his religious doctrines, 


St. Augustine is frankly neo-Platonist ; as soon as a contradiction 
arises, he never hesitates to subordinate his philosophy to religion, 
reason to -faith! (p. 86) ... He thought too easily to find Christian- 
ity in Plato, or Platonism in the Gospel. Thus he had imagined that in 
Platonism he had discovered the entire doctrine of the Word and the 
whole prologue of St. John. 5 * Augustine was baptized on Easter of 
387. He did not think of entering the priesthood ; but being in church 
one day at prayer, the clamor of the crowd caused him to yield, despite 
his tears, to the demand, and he was consecrated in 391, and entered 
actively into the fray. A great controversy arose "over these grave 
questions : Do the hierarchical powers depend upon the moral worth 
of the priest? How can the holiness of the Church be compatible with 
the unworthiness of its ministers ? [The moral situation must have 
been very acute to necessitate such a debate]. In the dogmatic debate 
he established the Catholic thesis that the Church, so long as it is upon 
earth, can, without losing its holiness, tolerate sinners within its pale 
for the sake of converting them"[?] or their property. 

In the City of God, which "is considered his most important work," 
Augustine "answers the Pagans, who attributed the fall of Rome 
(410) to the abolition of Pagan worship. In it, considering the prob- 
lem of Divine Providence with regard to the Roman Empire, in a burst 
of genius he creates the philosophy of history, embracing as he does 
with a glance the destinies of the world grouped around the Christian 
religion, the only one which goes back to the beginning and leads 
humanity to its final term." (CE. ii, 84-89.) Let us now admire 


whereof, says His present Holiness in a special Encyclical on the 
great Philosopher: "The teaching of St. Augustine constitutes a 
precious statement of sublime truths. 55 (Herald-Tribune, Apr. 22, 

The City of God 9 by which he intends the Christianized World- 
City of Rome, is a ponderous tome, which cost Augustine some thir- 
teen years to write. Like the work of all the Fathers it is an 
embellished rehash of the myths of the Old Testament, highly spiced 
with "proofs' 5 from the Pagan gods and their prophetic Sibyls, the 



same style of exegesis being also used for the Gospels, all of which 
he accepts as Gospel truth. He begins- his philosophizing of history 
by swallowing the "Sacred Science' 5 of Genesis whole; he entitles a 
chapter: "Of the Falseness of the History which allots Many Thou- 
sand Years to the World's Past" ; and thus sneeringly dismisses those 
who knew better : "They are deceived, too, by those highly mendacious 
documents which profess to give the history of many thousand years, 
though reckoning by the sacred writings, we find that not yet 6,000 
years have passed. . . . There are some, again, who are of opinion 
that this is not the only world, but that there are numberless worlds." 
(Civ. Dei, Bk. xii, 10, 11 ; N&PNF. ii, 232, 233.) Such persons are 
not to be argued with but to be ridiculed : "For as it is not yet 6,000 
years since the first man, who is called Adam, are not those to be 
ridiculed rather than refuted who try to persuade us of anything re- 
garding a space of time so different from, so contrary to, the ascer- 
tained truth?" (7&. xviii, 40; p. 384.) To prove that "there were 
giants in those days," and that the ante-Diluvians were of greater 
size than men of his times, he vouches : "I myself, along with others, 
saw on the shore at Utica a man's* molar tooth of such a size, that 
if it were cut down into teeth such as we have, a hundred, I fancy, 
could have been- made out of it. ... Bones of almost incredible size 
have been found by exposure of sepulchres." (xv, 9 ; p. 291.) And he 
shows how, "according to the Septuagint, Methuselah survived the 
Flood by fourteen years." (xv, 11 ; p. 292.) He accepts the earth as 
flat and inhabited on the upper side only : "As to the fable that there 
are Antipodes, that is to say, men who are on the opposite side of the 
earth, where the sun rises when it sets to us, men who walk with their 
feet opposite ours, is on no ground credible." (xvi, 9 ; p. 315.) 

Augustine is credited with a scientific leaning towards the doctrine 
of Evolution and as recognizing the origin of species ; but some of 
his species are truly singular, and withal are but variations from the 
original divine norm of Father Adam, who is father of them all. In all 
soberness, tinged with a breath of skepticism with respect to some, 
he thus philosophizes : "It is reported that some monstrous races of 
men have one eye in the middle of the forehead ; some, the feet turned 
backward from the heel; some, a double sex, the right breast* like a 
man, the left like a woman, and that they alternately beget and bring 


forth ; others are said to have no mouth. . . . They tell of a race 
who have two feet but only one leg, and are of marvellous swiftness, 
though they do not bend the knee ; they are called Skiopedes, because 
in the hot weather they lie down on their backs and shade themselves 
with their feet. Others are said to have no head on their shoul- 
ders. . . . What shall we say of the Cynocephali, whose doglike head 
and barking proclaim them beasts rather than men? But we are not 
bound to believe all we hear of these monstrosities. . . . But who 
could enumerate all the human births that have differed widely from 
their ascertained parents? No one will deny that all these have 
descended from that one man, . . . that one first father of all. . . . 
Accordingly, it ought not to seem absurd to us, that as in the individ- 
ual races there are monstrous births, so in the whole race there are 
monstrous races ; ... if they are human, they are descended from 
Adam.'* (xvi, 8; p. 315.) 

It is not alone in the realm of the genus homo that oddities exist, 
in the animal world there are some very notable singularities, for 
which the Saint vouches with all confidence as out of his personal 
knowledge and experience. Several times he repeats the marvel of 
the peacock, "which is so favored by the Almighty that its flesh will 
not decay," and "which triumphs over that corruption from which 
even the flesh of Plato is not exempt." He says : "It seems incredible, 
but a peacock was cooked and served to me in Carthage; and I kept 
the flesh one year and it was as fresh as ever, only a little drier." 
(xxi, 4, 5; pp. 455,, 458.) The now exploded doctrine of abiogenesis 
was strong with Augustine; some animals are born without sexual 
antecedents: "Frogs are produced from the earth, not propagated 
by male and female parents 5 * (xvi, 7; p. 314) ; "There are in Cappa- 
docia mares which are impregnated by the wind, and their foals live 
only three years. 3 * (xxi, 5; p. 456.) There was much question as to 
the efficacy of hell-fire in toasting lost souls through eternity. The 
master philosopher of all time solves the knotty problem in two chap- 
ters, under the titles : "2. Whether it is Possible for Bodies to last 
Forever in Burning Fire," and, "4. Examples from Nature proving 
that Bodies may remain Unconsumed and Alive in Fire. 5 * In the first 
place, before the lamentable Fall of Adam, our own bodies were im- 
perishable ; in Hell we will again get ^inconsumable bodies : "Even 



this human flesh was constituted in one fashion before there was Sin, 
was constituted, in fact, so that it could not die." (xxi, 8 ; p. 459.) 
But there are other proofs of this than theological say-so, the skepti- 
cal may have the proofs with their own eyes in present-day Nature : 
"There are animals which live in the midst of flames. . . . The sala- 
mander is well known, that it lives in fire. Likewise, in springs of water 
so hot that no one can put his hand in it with impunity, a species of 
worm is found, which not only lives there, but cannot live else- 
where. . . , These animals live in that blaze of heat without pain, 
the element of fire being congenial to their nature and causing it to 
thrive and not to suffer," an argument which "does not suit our 
purpose" on the point of painless existence in fire of these animals, 
in which particular the wisdom of God has differentiated the souls 
of the damned, that they may suffer ' exquisitely forever; in which 
argument Augustine implies the doctrine, as feelingly expressed by 
another holy Saint, the "Angelic Doctor" Aquinas : "In order that 
nothing may be wanting to the felicity of the blessed spirits in 
heaven, a perfect view is granted to them of the tortures of the 
damned" ; all these holy ones in gleeful praise to God look down at 
the damned disbelievers "tormented with fire and brimstone in the 
presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb : and the 
smoke of their torment ascendeth for ever and ever ; and they have 
no rest day nor night." (Rev. xiv, 10, 11.) 

In the realm of inorganic nature are many marvels, a long cata- 
logue of which our philosopher makes, and at several places repeats ; 
some of these are by hearsay and current report, for which cautiously 
he does not vouch the truth; "but these I know to be true: the case 
of that fountain in which burning torches are extinguished, and ex- 
tinguished torches are lit : and the apples of Sodom, which are ripe 
to appearance, but are filled with dust"! (xxi, 7; p. 458.) The dia- 
mond is the hardest known stone ; so hard indeed that it cannot be 
cut or worked "by anything, except goat's blood." (p. 455.) 

The greatest of Christian Doctors, pyramid of philosophers, has 
abiding faith in the reality of the Pagan gods, who, however, as held 
by all the Fathers, are really demons or devils ; they are very potent 
as wonder-workers and magicians. Some of them, however, are evi- 
dently not of a malicious nature : "The god of Socrates, if he had a 


god, cannot have belonged to this class of demons." (xiii, 27 ; p. 165.) 
Time and again he vouches for and quotes the famous Hermes Tris- 
megistus, who he assures us was the grandson of the "first Mercury." 
(viii, 23, 24; pp. 159, 161.) And for history he says, that "At this 
time, indeed, when Moses was born, Atlas is found to have lived, that 
great astronomer, the brother of Prometheus, and maternal grand- 
son of the elder Mercury, of whom that Mercury Trismegistus was 
the grandson." (xviii, 39 ; p. 384.) Also that "Picus, son of Saturn, 
was the first king of Argos." (xviii, 15 ; p. 368.) He accepts as his- 
toric truth the fabulous founding of Rome by Romulus and Remus, 
their virgin-birth by the god Mars, and their nursing by the she- 
wolf, but attributes the last to the provident interference of the He- 
brew God. Some of his comments might be applicable to One later 
Virgin-born. "Rhea, a vestal virgin, who conceived twin sons of Mars, 
as they will have it, in that way honoring or excusing her adultery, 
adding as a proof that a she-wolf nursed the infants when exposed. 
. . . Yet, what wonder is it, if, to rebuke the king who had cruelly 
ordered them to be thrown into the water, God was pleased, after 
divinely delivering them from the water, to succor, by means of a 
wild beast giving milk, these infants by whom so great a City was to 
be founded?" (xviii, 21 ; p. 372.) 

The great philosopher, at one with Cicero in this respect, dis- 
tinguishes between the ancient fables of the gods in an age of igno- 
rance and superstition, and those true histories of their later deeds in 
a time, such as that of the Founding of the City, when intelligence 
reigned among men. A singular reversion to the mental state of the 
Homeric ages would seem to have come upon men with the advent 
of the new Faith. Cicero had related the fables of Homer and con- 
trasted them with the true history of Romulus and his more enlight- 
ened times, saying: "Homer had flourished long before Romulus, and 
there was now so much learning in individuals, and so generally dif- 
fused an enlightenment, that scarcely any room was left for fable. 
For antiquity admitted fables, and sometimes very clumsy ones ; but 
this age of Romulus was sufficiently enlightened to reject whatever 
had not the air of truth" ! On this the great Saint Augustine thus 
philosophizes, accounting, indeed, for the age-long persistence of 
all superstitions, as due to inheritance and early teaching: "But who 



believed that Romulus was a god except Rome, which was then small 
and weak? Then afterwards it was necessary that succeeding gen- 
erations should preserve the traditions of their ancestors; that, drink- 
ing in this superstition with their mother's milk, their nation should 
grow great and dominate the world"? (xxii, 6 ; p. 483.) In likewise it 
may be queried : Who believed that Jesus was a virgin-born god ex- 
cept superstitious Pagans who already believed such things of Romu- 
lus, Apollo, JEsculapius, et id omne genus? and the succeeding gen- 
erations, "drawing in this superstition with their mother's milk," 
have passed it on through the Dark Ages of Faith even unto our own 
day. Even the great St. Jerome has said, that no one would have be- 
lieved the Virgin-birth of Jesus or that his mother was not an adul- 
teress, "until now, that the whole world has embraced the -faith" and 
would therefore believe anything except the truth ! 

All who did not believe such things, when related by the ex-Pagan 
Christians, were heretics instigated by the devil ; for "the devil, see- 
ing the temples of the gods deserted, and the human race running to 
the name of the living Mediator, has moved the heretics under the 
Christian name to resist the Christian doctrine." (xviii, 51 ; p. 392.) 
Whether St. Augustine, in his earlier Pagan years, practiced the arts 
of magic, as did many of the other ex-Pagan Christian Fathers, he 
maintained a firm Christian faith in magic and magicians, and ex- 
plains how the gift is acquired. He gives an account of a remarkable 
lamp which hung in a temple of Venus in a great candelabra; al- 
though exposed to the open air, even the strongest winds could not 
blow out the flame. But that is nothing strange to the philosophic 
mind of the Saint: "For to this [unextinguishable lamp] we add a 
host of marvels wrought by man, or by magic, that is, by man under 
the influence of devils, or by the devils directly, -for such marvels we 
cannot deny without impugning the truth of the sacred Scriptures 
we believe. . . . Now, devils are attracted to dwell in certain temples 
by means of the creatures who present to them the things which suit 
their various tastes. . . . The devils cunningly seduce men and make 
of a few of them their disciples, who then instruct others. . . . Hence 
the origin of magic and magicians." (xxi, 6 ; p. 457.) A most notable 
example of magical power is that which transforms men into animals, 
sometimes effected by the potent word, sometimes through material 


means, as where sundry inn-keepers used to put a drug into food 
which would work the transformation of their guests into wild or 
domestic animals. 

The philosopher Saint vouches for such magical metamorphoses 
as of his own knowledge and on unimpeachable authority. At much 
length he relates: "A certain man named Praestantius used to tell 
that it happened to his father in his own house, that he took that poison 
in a piece of cheese, . . . and that he had been made a sumpter horse, 
and, along with other beasts of burden, had carried provisions for the 
Rhoetian Legion. And all this was found to have taken place just as 
he told. . . . These things have not come to us from persons we might 
deem unworthy of credit, but from informants we could not suppose to 
be deceiving us. Therefore, what men say and have committed to writ- 
ing about the Arcadians being often changed into wolves by the Ar- 
cadian gods, or demons rather, and what is told in the song about 
Circe transforming the companions of Ulysses, if they were really 
done, may, in my opinion, have been in the way I have said [that is, 
by demons through the permission of 'God]. ... As for Diomede's 
birds, . . . that they bring water in their beaks and sprinkle it on 
the temple of Diomede, and that they fawn on men of Greek race and 
persecute aliens, is no wonderful thing to be done by the inward influ- 
ence of demons." (xviii, 18; p. 370.) To the Saint and to all the Fa- 
thers, the air was full of devils : "All diseases of Christians are to be 
ascribed to these demons; chiefly do they torment fresh-baptized 
Christians, yea, even the guiltless new-born infant." (De Divinatione 
Dcemonorum, ch. iii), a whole tome devoted to the prophetic works 
of the Devil, "after the working of Satan with all power and signs and 
lying wonders," as avouched in Holy Writ (II Thess. ii, 9) ; for : "The 
responses of the gods are uttered by impure demons with a strong ani- 
mus against the Christians." (De Civ. Dei, xix, 23; p. 416.) And no 
wonder, for "by the help of magicians, whom Scripture calls enchant- 
ers and sorcerers, the devils could gain such power. . . . The noble 
poet Vergil describes a very powerful magician in these lines," (quot- 
ing; xxi, 6; p. 457). 

Again, like all the holy Fathers and Popes down at least to Bene- 
dict XIV, elsewhere quoted, the great philosopher and Saint is a de- 
voted Sibyllist, and frequently quotes and approves the utterances 



of these Pagan Seeresses, inspired by the devil through the permis- 
sion of the Christian God to reveal the holy mysteries of the Christian 
Faith. Augustine devotes a chapter, entitled "Of the Erythraean 
Sibyl, who is known to have sung many things about Christ more 
plainly than the other Sibyls," to these signal Pagan proofs of the 
Christ ; and he dwells with peculiar zest on the celebrated "Fish Ana- 
gram." On this theme he enlarges : "This Sibyl certainly wrote some 
things concerning Christ which are quite manifest [citing instances], 
... A certain passage which had the initial letters of the lines so 
arranged that these words could be read in them: 'lesous Xristos 
Theou Uios Soter 9 [quoting the verses at length]. ... If you join 
the initial letters in these five Greek words, they will make the word 
Ixthus, that is, *fish,* in which word Christ is mystically understood, 
because he was able to live, that is, to exist, without sin, in the abyss 
of this mortality as in the depths of water." (xviii, 23; p. 372-3.) 
With full faith the great Doctor Augustine accepts the old fable 
of the miraculous translation of the Septuagint, and to it adds some 
new trimmings betraying his intimate knowledge of the processes and 
purposes of God in bringing it about : "It is reported that there was 
an agreement in their words so wonderful, stupendous, and plainly 
divine, each one apart (for so it pleased Ptolemy to test their fidelity), 
they differed from each other in no word, or in the order of the words ; 
but, as if the translators had been one, so what all had translated was 
one, because in very deed the one Spirit had been in them all. And they 
received so wonderful a gift of God, in order that these Scriptures 
might be commended not as human but divine, for the benefit of the 
nations who should at some time believe, as we now see them doing. 
... If anything is in the Hebrew copies and not in the version of the 
Seventy, the Spirit of God did not choose to say it through them, but 
only through the prophets. But whatever is in the Septuagint and not 
in the Hebrew copies, the same Spirit chose rather to say it through 
the latter, thus showing that both were prophets." (xviii, 42, 43; pp. 
385-387.) If this latter be true, that some divine revelation is found 
in the Septuagint which is not in the Hebrew, and vice versa, how then 
can it be true, as the Saint has just said, and as all the Fathers say, 
that there was perfect agreement between the Hebrew original and the 
Greek translations? If matters in the Hebrew text were omitted in 


the Greek, then the inspired truth of God was not in those parts of 
the original, or else what was inspired truth in the Hebrew became now 
false ; and if there was new matter now in the Greek, such portions 
were not translation but were interpolations or plain forgeries of the 
translators, yet inspired by God. The divine origin of the Hebrew 
language, as invented by God for the use of Adam and Eve and their 
posterity, is thus fabled by the great Doctor: "When the other races 
were divided by their own peculiar languages [at Babel], Heber's 
family preserved that language which is not unreasonably believed to 
have been the common language of the race, and that on this account 
it was henceforth called Hebrew." (p. 122.) As for the origin of 
writing, our Saint agrees with St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome, and other 
erudite Saints, that "God himself showed the model and method of 
all writing when he delivered the Law written with his own finger to 
Moses." (White, Warfare of Science against Theology, ii, 181.) 

This greatest philosopher of all time attacks with profound learn- 
ing a problem which, he says, he had "previously mentioned, but did 
not decide," and he proceeds with acutest wisdom to solve the ques- 
tion : "Whether angels, inasmuch as they are spirits, could have bodily 
intercourse with women?" With all the powers of his mighty philo- 
sophico-clerical mind he reasons on the ethereal nature of angels, and 
reaches the conclusion, fortified by many ancient instances, that they 
can and do. There are, he points out, "many proven instances, that 
Sylvans and Fauns, who are commonly called *Incubi,* had often 
made wicked assaults upon women, and satisfied their lusts upon them : 
and that certain devils, called Duses by the Gauls, are constantly at- 
tempting and effecting this impurity." (City of God, xv, 23 ; p. 303.) 
As the greatest Doctor and Theologian of the Church, he discusses 
weightily what books of Scripture are inspired and canonical, which 
are fables and apocryphal: *TLet us omit, then, the fables of those 
Scriptures, which are called apocryphal. . . . We cannot deny that 
Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings, for this is 
asserted by the Apostle Jude in his canonical Epistle" ! ( Ibid, p. 305.) 
Thus the great Doctor vindicates the potentiality of the Holy Ghost, 
in the guise of the angel Gabriel, to maintain carnal copulation with 
the "proliferous yet Ever Virgin" Mother of God; and vouches for 
the divinity of the crude Jewish forgery of the Book of Enoch, which 



is duly canonized as genuine and authentic work of the mythical Pa- 
triarch, by the equally mythical "Apostle" author of the forged 
Epistle of Jude. So great a Doctor of the Church looks, by now, very 
much like an extraordinary "quack doctor" peddler of bogus nos- 

Such are a few picked from numberless ensamples of the quasi- 
divine wisdom and philosophy of this unparalleled, pyramidal Saint 
and Doctor of the Church, who "never hesitated to subordinate his 
reason to Faith." Most luminously and profoundly of all the Fathers 
and Doctors, Augustine spoke the mind and language of the Church 
and of its Pagan-born Christianity ; more ably than them all he used 
the same methods of propaganda of the Faith among the superstitious 
ex-Pagan Christians ; with greater authority and effect than all the 
others, he exploited the same fables, the same falsehoods, the same 
absurdities, exhibited to the ^-th degree the same fathomless fatuity 
of faith and subjugation of reason to credulity. 

A final appeal to the Pagan Sibyls and to the fabulous Phoenix for 
"proofs" of the Christian mysteries, I add from the famous forged 
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, falsely through the centuries 
attributed as the individual and collective inspired work of the mythic 
Twelve : "If the Gentiles laugh at us, and disbelieve our Scriptures, let 
at least their own prophetess Sibylla oblige them to believe, who says 
thus in express words : [quoting] . If, therefore, this prophetess con- 
fesses the Resurrection ... it is vain for them to deny our doctrine. 
They say there is a bird single in its kind which affords a copious dem- 
onstration of the Resurrection. . . , They call it a phoenix, and re- 
late [here repeating the old Pagan fable of the self -resurrecting phoe- 
nix]. If, therefore, as even themselves say, a resurrection is exhibited 
by means of an irrational bird, wherefore do they disparage our ac- 
counts, when we profess that He who by His power brings that into 
being which was not in being before, is able to restore this body, and 
raise it up again after its dissolution?" (Apost. Const. V, 1, vii ; ANF. 
vii, 440-441.) 


The whole of Paganism we have seen taken over bodily into "that 
new Paganism later called Christianity," by the ex-Pagan Fathers of 


the Christ's Church, and all its myths and fables urged by them as 
the credible and only "evidence of things not seen" of the new Faith. 
What does it all signify for proof of Christian Truth? "Nothing 
stands in need of lying but a Lie" ; and by that unholy means we see 
the holy false new Faith established among the ignorant and super- 
stitious Pagans. 

These sainted ex-Pagan Fathers of Christianity, one and all, fully 
and explicitly accepted and believed in childlike simplicity of faith 
the reality and potency of their old heathen gods, reducing them only 
in immortal rank to demons or devils of fantastic origin and powers 
permitted by the One True God to work true miracles ; by their inspired 
oracles to foretell futurity and the most sacred mysteries of the Chris- 
tian faith, and maliciously to "imitate" hundreds of years in ad- 
vance its most holy rites and sacraments; to endow their votaries 
with the gift of magic and the powers of magical practices, prac- 
tices to this day performed by their priestly successors under more 
refined euphemisms of thaumaturgy. To the malignant works of the 
Devil and the hordes of devils the Fathers imputed, and their now-a- 
day successors yet impute, the working of mighty lying wonders de- 
signed to thwart, and often very effective in "queering" the inscrut- 
able plans and providences of their Almighty God. "When pious 
Christians," mordently says Middleton, "are arrived at this pitch of 
Credulity, as to believe that evil spirits or evil men can work real 
miracles, in defiance and opposition to the authority of the Gospels, 
their very piety will oblige them to admit as miraculous whatever is 
wrought in the defense of it, and so of course make them the implicit 
dupes of their wonder-workers." (A Free Inqwry, p. 71.) 

This review of the ex-Pagan Fathers of Christ's True Church is 
made at some length because of its capital, fatal importance to the 
notion of the "authority," veracity and credibility of these the sole wit- 
nesses and vouchers for the pretended truth and validity of the new 
faith, and the "Gospel" wonders reputed as having occurred a cen- 
tury and more before their times, and for the foundation of the Church 
and the miraculous fundamentals of the Christian religion. Fabling, 
false and fatuous in point of every single pretended "proof" which 
they offer for Christianity, in every respect fatal to their intelligence, 
their intellectual honesty, their common veracity and general and 



particular credibility with respect to matters both natural and super- 
natural How can they be believed as to the miracles and miracu- 
lous and incredible basic "truths" of Christianity? False in one 
thing, false and discredited in all, must be the verdict of every one 
concerned to know the truth of the new Faith sponsored and estab- 
lished alone through the mongering of Pagan myths of these fatuous, 
childishly credulous, unscrupulous ex-Pagan Fathers of Christianity. 
They knew not fable from fact, and scrupled not to assert fable for 
fact, recklessly lying to the greater glory of God and glorification of 
themselves and their Paganized Church, in the name of Divinely re- 
vealed Truth of God. But, as we have seen, there can be no "divine reve- 
lation" of fanciful "fact" and dogma which for centuries had been, and 
in the early Christian ages were, the current mythology of credulous 
Pagandom. Thus the system of veneered Paganism which the ex- 
Pagan Fathers revamped under the name of Christianity, cannot be 
true; by a thousand tokens and tests of truth it is not true. 

In the words of King Lear is the whole mythical scheme to be ap- 
praised and adjudged, and junked: 

" It is a tale 

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, 
Signifying nothing !" 

BUT ff What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us!" 

Our review of the fabling forging Fathers of Christianity brings 
us through the epoch of the establishment of Christianity the whole 
of the second and third centuries of the Christ, the epoch (in the 
latter half of the second), when the forged "Gospel" biographies of 
the Demiurge-Christ, and the forged Epistles of the Apostles, were, 
out of hundreds of like pious Christian forgeries, worked into shape 
and put into circulation by the growing Churches zealously gathering 
swarms of illiterate and superstitious ex-Pagan "converts" or per- 
verts into the Fold of Christ. With Eusebius and Lactantius, con- 
temporaries and retainers of the "Christian" Constantine, we see the 
official "triumph" of Christianity in the early fourth century ; with 
the Sainted Augustine, late in the fourth and early in the fifth cen- 
turies, we see the new Faith, by dint of Christian persecuting laws and 


of patristic lying, well established in the Empire,* "the human race 
running to the name of the living Mediator," but yet, at the instigation 
of the Devil, disturbed and threatened with extinction by the Christian 
"heretics," of whom Augustine says there were ninety-three warring 
sects up to his time ; and against whom this great Doctor and Saint 
produced that fearful text of the Wedding Feast, "Compel them to 
come in," and that other fatal bloody precept of the Christ : "Those 
mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring 
hither, and slay them before me," murderous slogans of the Church 
Persecutrix which bloodily carried it to final triumph through a thou- 
sand years of the Dark Ages of Faith, as we shall soon see. 

Others of the noted Fathers of the epochs under review will be no- 
ticed as the occasion arises. There are many of them ; the four "great 
Latin Fathers . . . are undoubtedly Sts. Augustine, Jerome, Am- 
brose, and Gregory the Great"; died 604. (CE. vi, 1.) Vast is their 
output of puerile superstition and pettyfogging dialectic, of which 
we have seen but some random ensamples. The overwhelming volume 
of patristic palaver of nonsense is evidenced by the "Migne Collection" 
of their writings, which comprises 222 ponderous tomes in Latin and 
161 in Greek. (CE. vi, 16.) 

In the next chapter we shall consider the "canonical" Gospels and 
Epistles, and the palpable convincing and convicting evidences of 
their forgery by the priests and Fathers original forgeries them- 
selves with multiplied forged "interpolations" or purpose-serving 
later additions to each of the original sacred forgeries. 




"Whether a Church which stands convicted of having forged its Creed, 
would have any scruple of forging its Gospels, is a problem that the reader 
will solve according to the influence of prejudice or probability on his 
mind." Taylor, Diegesis, p. 10. 

LET us NOW take up the holy Evangels and Epistles of Christ- 
propaganda. After even our cursory examination of the welter 
of Gospels, Acts, Epistles and other pious frauds of Chris- 
tian missionary-work, all admittedly forged by holy hands in the 
early Christian "age of apocryphal literature" in the names 
of Jesus Christ himself, of the Twelve pseudo-apostles and other 
Worthies, including Mother Eve, even the most credulous and 
uncritical Believer must feel the intrusion of some question : How came 
the four "Gospels according to" Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, to be 
sometime accepted as genuine and inspired? and, Why are there only 
Four out of so much greater a number, as we have seen in circulation 
and acceptance? The questions are pertinent, and shall be given fair 

This entire aggregation of forged religious writings, under the 
guise of genuine Gospels, Acts, Epistles, Apocalypses, falsely attrib- 
uted to apostolic writers, is know together as "Old Christian Lit- 
erature," whether now called "canonical" or apocryphal. Of it EB. 
says that this present distinction "does not, in point of fact, rest upon 
any real diff erence in the character or origin of the writings concerned, 
but only upon the assumption of their differing values as sacred or 
non-sacred books." (EB. iii, 3481.) Furthermore, the common char- 
acteristic and motive of them all is thus described, or explained : "To 
compose 'letters* under another name, especially under the name of 
persons whose living presentment, or real or supposed spiritual equip- 


ment, it was proposed to set before the reader, was then just as usual 
as was the other practice of introducing the same persons into nar- 
ratives and reporting their 'words' in the manner of which we have 
examples, in the case of Jesus, in the Gospels, and, ,in the case of 
Peter, Paul, and other apostles, in the Acts." (EB. iii, 3481.) 

"The Gospel has come down to us," says Bishop Irenaeus (about 
185 A. D.), which the apostles did at one time proclaim in public, and, 
at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scrip- 
tures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith. . . . For, after our 
Lord rose from the dead [the apostles] departed to the ends of the 
earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good things sent from God 
to us, who indeed do equally and individually possess the Gospel of 
God." (Iren., Adv. Hcer, Bk. HI, ch. i; ANF. i, 41 4.) Bishop Irenaeus 
and Bishop Papias have both averred that the Christ lived to old age 
(even at late as 98-117 A. D.), flatly denying thus as "heresy" the 
Gospel stories as to his crucifixion at about thirty years of age. In any 
event, the Apostles, according to the record, scattered "to the ends of 
the earth, preaching," orally, before they wrote anything at all. 

But, says CE., although "the New Testament was not written all 
at once, the books that compose it appeared one after another in the 
space of fifty years, i. e. y in the second half of the first century." (CE. 
xiv, 530.) That this last clause is untrue will be fully and readily dem- 
onstrated. This statement, too, contradicts Bishops Papias and 
Irenaeus, who are, positively, the only two of the second century Fa- 
thers who up to their times at all mention written Gospels or their 
supposed authors, as we have seen and shall more particularly notice. 

And CE. says, as is true, of the earliest existing manuscripts of any 
New Testament books : "We have New Testament MSS. written not 
much more than 300 years after the composition of the books" ; and it 
admits (though with much diminution of truth, as we shall see) : "And 
in them we find numerous differences, though but few of them are im- 
portant." (CE. xiv, 526.) In this CE. at another place, and speaking 
much more nearly the truth, contradicts itself, saying: "The exist- 
ence of numerous and, at times, considerable differences between the 
four canonical Gospels is a fact which has long been noticed and which 
all scholars readily admit. . . . Those evangelical records (SS. Mat- 
thew, Mark, Luke) whose mutual resemblances are obvious and strik- 



ing, and . . . the narrative (that of St. John) whose relation with 
the other three is that of dissimilarity rather than that of likeness." 
(CE. vi, 658.) 

But the so-called "canonical" books of the New Testament, as of 
the Old, are a mess of contradictions and confusions of text, to the 
present estimate of 150,000 and more "variant readings," as is well 
known and admitted. Thus CE. : "It is easy to understand how nu- 
merous would be the readings of a text transcribed as often as the 
Bible, and, as only one reading can represent the original, it follows 
that all the others are necessarily -faulty. Mill estimated the variants 
of the New Testament at 30,000, and since the discovery of so many 
MSS. unknown to Mill, this number has greatly increased." (CE. iv, 
498.) Who, then, is "inspired" to distinguish true from false readings, 
and thus to know what Jesus Christ and his entourage really said and 
did, or what some copyist's error or priest's forgery make them say 
or do, falsely? Of the chaos and juggling of sacred texts in the Great 
Dioceses of Africa, CE. says : "There never existed in early Christian 
Africa an official Latin text known to all the Churches, or used by 
the faithful to the exclusion of all others. The African bishops will- 
ingly allowed corrections to be made in a copy of the Sacred Scrip- 
tures, or even a reference, when necessary, to the Greek text. With 
some exceptions, it was the Septuagint text that prevailed, for the 
O. T., until the fourth century. In the case of the New, the MSS. were 
of the Western type. On this basis there arose a variety of transla- 
tions and interpretations. . . . Apart from the discrepancies to be 
found in two quotations from the same text in the works of two dif- 
ferent authors, and sometimes of the same author, we now know that 
of several books of Scripture there were versions wholly independent 
of each other." (CE. i, 193.) 

Bishop Victor of Tunnunum, who died about 569 A. B. and whose 
work, says CE. 9 "is of great historical value," says that in the fifth 
century, "In the consulship of Messala, at the command of the Em- 
peror Anastasius, the Holy Gospels, as written Idiotis Evangelistis, 
are corrected and amended." (Victor of T., Chromca y p. 89-90 ; cited 
by Dr. Mills, Prolegom. to R. V., p. 98.) This would indicate some 
very substantial tinkering with Holy Writ ; which process was a con- 
tinuing one, for, says CE., "Under Sixtus V (1585-90) and Clement 


VIII (1592-1605) the Latin Vulgate after years of revision attained 
its present shape." (CE. 9 xii, 769.) And the Vulgate, which was 
fiercely denounced as fearfully corrupt, was only given sanction of 
divinity by the Council of Trent in 1546, under the Curse of God 
against any who questioned it. Though this amendatory tinkering 
of their two Holinesses was after the Council of Trent had put the 
final Seal of the Holy Ghost on the Vulgate in 1546 ! 


The ancient clerical trick of tampering with the "Word of God" 
and amending its plenary Divine Inspiration and Inerrancy, goes 
on apace today, even to the extent of putting a veneer of civilization 
on the barbarian Hebrew God, and warping his own barbarian words 
so as to make a semblance of a "God of Mercy" out of the self-styled 
"Jealous God" of Holy Writ. 

In 1902, after the sacred Council of Trent, in 1546, had put the 
Curse of God on any further tinkering with the Inerrant Bible, His 
Holiness Leo XIII appointed a Commission of Cardinals, known as 
the Pontifical Biblical Commission, to further amend Divine Inspira- 
tion; in 1907, "the Commission, with the approval of the sovereign 
pontiff, invited the Benedictine Order to undertake a collection of 
the variant readings of the Latin Vulgate as a remote preparation 
for a thoroughly amended edition." (CE. ii, 557.) This august body 
has recently laid before His Holiness, after all these years of labor, 
the revised text of the revelations of Moses in the Book of Genesis ; 
and is now worrying with Exodus and the "Ten Commandments" in 
chapter XX thereof. 

Associated Press dispatches published to the world today, relate 
that "the Vatican's International Commission on the revision of the 
Bible [is] taking steps to correct one of the most famous Biblical pas- 
sages, Exodus xx, 5, now believed to have been mistranslated?*! (N. Y. 
Times, May 18, 1930.) The actual text, and "what the Vatican Com- 
mission thinks it should read" are here quoted in the "deadly parallel" 
columns, so that all may judge of the immense farce and fraud of 
this capital falsification ; the material tampering being indicated by 
italics : 



Exodus xx, 5 as is. Ditto as falsified. 

"For I the Lord thy God am a "For I, the Lord thy God, am 

Jealous God, 'visiting the iniqui- a God of loving-kindness and 

ties of the fathers upon the chil- mercy, considering the errors of 

dren unto the third and fourth the fathers as mitigating circum- 

generation of them that hate stances in judging the children 

me' 9 ; . . . unto the third and fourth genera- 

Even a fool knows that no set of words, humanly or divinely de- 
visable, could bear such enormity of contrary translation; this is 
self-evident. The simple Hebrew words of verse 5 do not admit of a 
word of tampering in translation. Even the present translations into 
modern languages make apparent the correctness of the familiar ren- 
dering. The words of verse 5 "visiting the iniquities ... of them 
that hate me," close with a semicolon, followed immediately by their 
antithesis : "And shewing mercy [Heb. chesed~\ unto thousands of 
'them that love me, and keep my commandments." (v. 6 ; Deut. v, 9, 
10.) The "Jealous God" pursues the progeny of those "that hate'* 
him, and "shews mercy ... to them that love" him. The inspired 
"correction" of the "mistranslation" leaves verse 6 meaningless and 

But the two simple Hebrew words chiefly involved make this fraudu- 
lent "correction" ridiculous and impossible. In Hebrew, Yahveh says 
from Sinai: "Anoki yahveh elohe-ka EL QANNA I Yahveh thy 
God [am a] Jealous God." The only false translation in this verse is 
"Lord thy God" for the 6,000-times falsified "Yahveh thy God," as 
elsewhere noted. Always "qanna" means "jealous" and is used of 
the "jealous god," husband, wife, etc. The "joker" in this false "cor- 
rection" is apparent from the word "chesed mercy," hundreds of 
times used in Holy Writ. There is no Hebrew word meaning "loving- 
kindness" ; this is a fanciful rendering given by the pious translators 
to the same old word "chesed mercy." Even the Infallible One knows- 
or can look in a Hebrew dictionary or concordance and see that 
"el qanna . . . visiting iniquity" cannot be twisted into "el chesed 
and chesed . . . shewing chesed mercy" to only those that love him. 
And how many thousands of "corrections" of words "now believed mis- 


translated," would be necessary to whitewash the barbarian Yahveh 
of Holy Writ into a "whited sepulchre" of civilized deity ! 


We have seen the debauchery of forgery out of which the Four 
Gospels were born. This makes pertinent the critical statement of one 
of the latest authorities on the subject : "Few genuine texts have come 
down to us from beyond the Middle Ages most documents reaching 
us in the form of later copies made by scribes in monasteries" ; and he 
adds : "The mere fact that documents have been accepted for centuries 
does not itself protect them from the tests of historical criticism." 
(Shotwell, See of Peter, Gen. Introd. xix, xxii.) It is pertinent to add 
here a paragraph from CE. which states with entire accuracy the 
elementary principles upon which literary criticism rests ; due to the 
application of just these principles by honest and fearless critics, the 
Bible has been stripped of every clerical pretense of inspired inerrancy 
and of even common literary and historical honesty ; so that even the 
inerrant Church has been driven to confess countless errors and for- 
geries ; even, as we have seen, to the frank repudiation of the fables of 
Creation, the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and the divine 
revelation of the Hebrew religion, which is thus shown to be a very 
human evolution. These critical principles have destroyed the vast 
mass of Hebrew and Christian apocrypha; and may now be applied 
to the New Testament booklets which yet make false pretense to di- 
vine inspiration of truth. Says CE. : 

"Some broad principles [of literary criticism] are universally admitted 
by critical scholars. A fundamental one is that a literary work always be- 
trays the imprint of the age and environment in which it was produced; 
another is that a plurality of authors is proved by well-marked differences 
of diction and style, at least when they coincide with distinctions of 'view- 
point or discrepancies in a double treatment of the same subject. A third 
received canon holds to a radical dissimilarity between ancient Semitic 
and modern Occidental, or Aryan, methods of composition/* (CE. iv, 

The lines last above in italics point to the most fatal of all proofs 
that of "double treatment" or forged "interpolations," than which 



nothing is clearer evidence of tampering and later fraudulent altera- 
tions of text. The most radical dissimilarity between the ancient Se- 
mitic methods of religious composition and our modern Occidental no- 
tions of literary honesty or even of intelligent forgery is, that the 
Hebrew and Greek religious forgers were so ignorant or careless of 
the principles of criticism, that they "interpolated" their fraudulent 
new matter into old manuscripts without taking care to erase or sup- 
press the previous statements glaringly contradicted by the new 
interpolations. Though, as the great masses of the ignorant Faithful 
couldn't read, it may have suited the design of the priests to retain both 
contradictory matters, either of which might be used according to oc- 
casion to impose on their credulous Flocks. 

When, therefore, in the same document, two statements of alleged 
fact or doctrine are found, one of which is in glaring contradiction of 
the other, one or the other is inevitably both false and to a moral cer- 
tainty the work of a later and different hand. When, furthermore, one 
of the statements is consonant with the time and conditions under 
which it was supposedly written, or to which it refers, and the con- 
tradictory "betrays the imprint of the age and environment in which 
it was written," later and different from that of the original, and/or 
betrays "distinctions of viewpoint or discrepancies" from the earlier 
version, inevitably the latter convicts itself of being forged. With 
these established and admitted principles in mind, we may now look a 
bit closely at these questioned documents of the Four Gospels. 


These Four are themselves forgeries and apocryphal "in the sin- 
ister sense of bearing names to which they have no right," as well as by 
their contents being false, with many forged "interpolations" or spu- 
rious additions. Even if the Four Gospels were themselves genuine, as 
we shall see they are not, yet admittedly their present titles are not 
original and given to them by the writers. The present clerical posi- 
tion, seeking to save the works, is that, like the Acts of the Apostles, 
"the name was -subsequently attached to the book, just as the headings 
of the several Gospels were a-ffixed to them." (CE. i, 117.) More par- 
ticularly speaking of the Gospel titles, the same authority says : "The 


first four historical books of the New Testament are supplied with 
titles (Gospel According to [Gr. Tcata] Matthew, According to Mark, 
etc.) which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors 
of those sacred writings. . . That, however, they do not go back to 
the first century of the Christian era, or at least that they are not 
original, is a position generally held at the present day. ... It thus 
appears that the titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evan- 
gelists themselves." (CE. vi, 655, 656.) The very fact that the late 
second century Gospel-titles are of Gospels "according to" this or 
that alleged apostle, rather than "The Gospel of Mark" eta, is itself 
confession and plenary proof that "Mark," et als., were not and were 
not intended to be represented as the real authors of those "accord- 
ing to" Gospels. The form of the titles to the Epistles also later 
tagged to them, as "The Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans," etc. 
makes this clear and convincing, that no Apostles wrote the "accord- 
ing to" Gospel-biographies of the Christ. 

It is obvious, too, from an attentive reading of the Four Gospels, 
that they are not arranged in our present collection in their order of 
composition ; "Matthew" certainly is not first in order, and is only put 
first because it begins with the "Book of the Generation of Jesus 
Christ." The Gospel "according to Mark" is now well established as 
the earliest of the first three, the "Synoptics," and "John" is clearly 
the latest. There has been much dispute on this point : "The ancient 
lists, versions, and ecclesiastical writings are far from being at one 
with regard to the order of these (4) sacred records of Christ's words 
and deeds. In early Christian literature the canonical Gospels are 
given m no less than eight orders 9 besides the one (Matthew, Mark, 
Luke, John) with which we are familiar." (CE. vi, 657.) 

Let us pause a moment to catch the full force of these admissions by 
CE. and note their consequences fatal to the pretense of Apostolic 
authorship or origin of these Gospels. We shall shortly see amplest 
proofs that none of the Four existed until well into the last half of 
the second century after so-called Christ and Apostles ; but here we 
have, by clearest inference, an admission that the Gospels were not 
written by Apostles or their contemporaries. These titles "do not go 
back to the respective authors of those sacred writings ; ... do not 
go back to the first century ; . . . are not original ; . . . are not 



traceable to the Evangelists." What an anomaly, in all literature ! most 
especially in apostolic "sacred records of Christ's words and deeds" ! 

Here we have these wonderful and "only true" inspired writings of 
the companions of the Chris t, eye-witnesses to his mighty career, writ- 
ten for the conversion and salvation of the world, floating around loose 
and anonymous for a century and a half, without the slightest indi- 
cation of their divine source and sanction ! All the flood of forged and 
spurious gospels, epistles, acts and revelations "the apocryphal 
and pseudo-Biblical writings with which the East especially had been 
flooded" (CE. iii, 272), bore the names of the pretended writers, from 
the false Books of Adam and Enoch to the forged "Gospel of Jesus 
Christ" and the "Apocalypse of St. Peter." But the authentic and 
true Gospels of the genuine Apostles of Christ, are nameless and date- 
less scraps of papyrus ! Imagine the great Fathers and Bishops of 
the Churches, the inspired and all-wise "Popes" of the Church at 
Rome, rising in their pulpits before the gaping Faithful ; taking up an 
anonymous roll of manuscript, and announcing : "Our lesson today is 
from, (ahem!) one of the wonderful Gospels of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ; but, (ahem!) I don't really know which one. It is by 
either Matthew, or Mark, or Luke, or John, I'm sure ; but the writer 
forgot to sign or insert his name. We will, however, worship God by- 
reading it anonymously in faith. No, here is one with a name to it ; we 
will now read from the inspired 'Gospel of Barnabas,* or the sacred 
'Shepherd of Hennas.* Let us sing that grand and reassuring old 
Hymn, 'How firm a foundation, ye Saints of the Lord, Is laid for your 
faith in His wonderful Word P Let us pray for more faith ; and remem- 
ber to believe what I have told you. Ite, missa est It's all over, beat 

Books, evidently, do not go the rounds of readers nor of inspired 
Churches for over a century without a title or name. The first mention 
of the names or titles, as of the "Gospels" to which they were "sup- 
plied" was, as we shall see, not until about 185 A. D., when the "Gos- 
pels according to" the Four first appear in ecclesiastical literature, 
and thereupon began their career in the current use of the Churches, 
and therefore, evidently, then first came into existence. The Four Gos- 
pels thus, self -evidently, did not could not for more than a century 
exist anonymous, without the Apostolic titles certifying their origin 


and authenticity. To pretend otherwise is sheer deceit and false pre- 


The only possible pretext whereby generations of men should be 
persuaded or cozened or compelled to accept and believe the Gospels 
(as well as the other N. T. books), even under the genial threat "he 
that believeth not shall be damned," is that these books were written 
by immediate companions and apostles of the Christ, faithful eye- 
witnesses to his work and word, commanded and inspired by Christ, 
God, or the Holy Ghost (which one is not explicit), to write and pub- 
lish these wonderful biographies of the Christ. This is explicitly the 
teaching and dogma of the Church : no real Apostolic author, no true 

Through pious Christian fraud and forgery, there were fraudu- 
lently in vogue some couple of hundred "books current under an Apos- 
tle's name in the Early Church, such as the Epistle of Barnabas and 
the Apocalypse of St. Peter," as CE. (iii, 274) admits of these fraudu- 
lent "sacred writings" with Apostolic titles. Our Ecclesiastical au- 
thority then states the "certain indubitable marks" whereby true 
Apostolic authenticity, essential to validity and credence, must be 
known : "For the primitive Church, evcmgeUcal character was the test 
of Scriptural sacredness. But to guarantee this character it was nec- 
essary that a book should be known as composed by the official wit- 
nesses and organs of the Evangel ; hence to certify the Apostolic au- 
thorship, or at least sanction^ of a work purporting to contain the 
Gospel of Christ." (CE. iii, 274.) All purported "Gospels" as to which 
Apostolic authorship or sanction could not be guaranteed and cer- 
tified were, of course, spurious, as is natural and proper. Yet, for 
centuries, false and forged "Gospels," etc., as the two just named, bore 
the Apostolic certificates of authenticity now confessed to be false. 


The impossibility of the pretense that the precious Four Gospels 
circulated nondescript and anonymous in the Churches for a century 
and a half, is patently belied by the specific instance of the "Gospel 



according to Mark/* of which Gospel we have the precise "history" 
recorded three centuries after the alleged notorious event. Bishop 
Eusebius is our witness, in his celebrated Church History. He relates 
that Peter preached orally in Rome, Mark being his "disciple" and 
companion. The people wanted a written record of Peter's preach- 
ments, and (probably because Peter couldn't write), they importuned 
Mark to write down "that history which is called the Gospel accord- 
ing to Mark." Mark having done so, "the Apostle (Peter) having as- 
certained what was done by revelation of the Spirit, was delighted 
. . . and that history obtained his authority for the purpose of being 
read in the Churches." (HE. Bk. II, ch. 15.) Thus Peter was dead at 
the time, but his ghost got the news and somehow communicated its 
delight and approval for the document to be a "Gospel" for the 
Churches. But in a later section the Bishop gives another version: 
the people- who heard Peter "requested Mark, who remembered well 
what he [Peter] had said, to reduce these things to writing. . . . 
Which, when Peter v/nderstood, he directly neither hindered nor en- 
couraged it." (HE. Bk. VI, ch. 14.) Peter, thus, was alive, but wholly 
indifferent about his alleged Gospel. 

The impossibilities of these contradictory fables need not detain 
us now. But both join in declaring that the "Gospel according to 
Mark" was publicly given to the Churches, at Rome, just before or 
after the death of Peter, 64-67 A. D. The moment, then, that this fa- 
mous manuscript fell from the inspired pen (but it was not inspired : 
Mark only "remembered well"), the Great Seal of the Holy Ghost 
was upon it, and it bore before the world the notorious crown of Can- 
onicity, and this fact was of course known to all the Roman Church. 
And so, of course, of the other three ; every papyrus containing these 
precious productions of Divine Inspiration must ipso facto be "can- 
onized" and notoriously sacred and of Divine sanction from the very 
day they were written. Every Church, Father, Bishop, and Pope must 
certainly have known the fact, and have glorified in their precious 

But so it was not. Pope Peter evidently did not and could not 
know it ; he was "martyred in Rome" 64-67, the Church tells us ; and 
the earliest date clerically claimed for "Mark" is some years after 
the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A. D. The great Pope Clement I (died 97 


A. D.?), first-to-fourth "successor" to Pope Peter, knew nothing of his 
great Predecessor's "Gospel according to Mark" ; for, admits the CE. : 
"The New Testament he never quotes verbally. Sayings of Christ are 
now and then given, but not in the words of the Gospels. It cannot be 
proved, therefore, that he used any one of the Synoptic Gospels." 
(CE. iv, 14.) Of course, he did not, could not; they were not then 
written. And no other Pope, Bishop or Father (except Papias and 
until Irenaeus), for nearly a century after "Pope Clement," ever men- 
tions or quotes a Gospel, or names Matthew, Mark, Luke or John* So 
for a century and a half until the books bobbed up in the hands of 
Bishop St. Irenaeus and were tagged as "Gospels according to" this 
or that Apostle, there exists not a word of them in all the tiresome 
tomes of the Fathers. It is humanly and divinely impossible that the 
"Apostolic authorship" and hence "canonicity" or divine inspiration 
of these Sacred Four should have remained, for a century and a half, 
unknown and unsuspected by every Church, Father, Pope and Bishop 
of Christendom if existent. Even had they been somewhat earlier in 
existence, never an inspired hint or human suspicion was there, that 
they were "Divine" or "Apostolic," or any different from the scores of 
"apocryphal or pseudo-Biblical writings with which the East espe- 
cially had been flooded," that they were indeed "Holy Scripture. 5 * 
Hear this notable admission : "It was not until about the middle of the 
second century that under the rubric of Scripture the New Testament 
writings were assimilated to the Old"! (CE. iii, 275), that is, be- 
came regarded as apostolic, sacred, inspired and canonical, or; 

To argue and prove that the Four were regarded as "Apostolic 3 * 
and hence "canonical" after the middle of the second century, argues 
and proves that until that late date they were not so regarded, 
which we have seen is- impossible if they had been written by Apostles 
a hundred years and more previously and authorized by them "for the 
purpose of being read in the Churches," as the very ground and pillar; 
of their foundation and faith. 

Follow the proofs and argument of the Church to its own undoing: 
"From the testimony of St. Irenaeus (A. D. 185) alone there can be no 
reasonable doubt that the Canon of the Gospel was inalterably fixed in 
the Catholic Church by the last quarter of the second century . . 



to the exclusion of any pretended Evangels. [Sundry writings men- 
tioned] presuppose the authority enjoyed by the Fourfold Gospel 
towards the middle of the second century. . . . Even Rationalistic 
scholars like Harnack admit the canonicity of the quadrif orm Gospel 
between the years 140-175." (CE. iii, 275.) Even CE. does not prove 
or claim that it was any earlier ; so here the Church and the Rational- 
ists are in accord on this fatal fact ! Certainly Popes Peter and Clement 
I, not to review the silent others, would have "inalterably fixed" the 
Divine Canonicity of the Four a century before, if they had known 
about these precious productions of the Apostles ; if, in fact, they 
had existed, the known works of Holy Apostles and apostolic men ! 
But until "towards the middle of the second century" there was 
no "canon" or notion of divinely inspired Apostolic Gospels sim- 
ply for the reason that until just about that period they were not in 

The sudden appearance at a certain late date, of a previously un- 
known document, which is then attributed to an earlier age and long 
since dead writers, is one of the surest earmarks of forgery. Thus CE. 
speaking of another monumental Church forgery (the "False De- 
cretals" of Isidore, hereafter noticed) urges this very fact as one 
of the most cogent grounds of the detection of that forgery : "These 
documents appeared suddenly in the ninth century and are nowhere 
mentioned before that time. . . . Then again there are endless an- 
achronisms," just as in the Gospels and Epistles. (CE. vi, 773.) 
More ample and compelling proofs of this destroying fact will soon be 


According to the names "supplied" to the Four 'Gospels, as to the 
other New Testament books, the "Apostolic" authors were all of them 
Jews ; the same is supposedly true of most of the now confessed apoc- 
rypha. All these were forgeries in the names of Jewish pseudo- 
apostles. But all of the Gospels, the other New Testament Books, and 
the forged apocrypha, were written in Greek. Self-evidently, these 
"ignorant and unlearned" peasant Apostles, speaking a vulgar 
Aramaic- Jewish dialect, could neither speak nor write Greek, if they 


could write at all. The Old Testament books were written mostly in 
Hebrew, which was a "dead language, 5 ' which only the priests could 
read ; thus in the synagogues of Palestine the rolls were read in He- 
brew, and then "expounded" to the hearers in their Aramaic dialect. 
But these Hebrew "Scriptures" had been translated into Greek, in 
the famous Septuagint version which we have admired. Here is an- 
other significant admission by CE.: it speaks of "the supposed whole- 
sale adoption and approval, by the Apostles, of the Greek, and there- 
fore larger Old Testament," that is, the Greek version containing the 
Jewish apocrypha ; and then admits the fact : "The New Testament 
undoubtedly shows a preference for the Septuagint ; out of about 350 
texts from the Old Testament [in the New], 300 favor the Greek ver- 
sion rather than the Hebrew." (CE. iii, 271.) It was also the Greek 
Septuagint and Greek forged Oracles, that were exclusively used by 
the Greek Fathers and priests in all the Gospel-propaganda work of 
the first three centuries. Obviously, the Gospels and other New Testa- 
ment booklets, written in Greek and quoting 300 times the Greek 
Septuagint, and several Greek Pagan authors, as Aratus, and Clean- 
thes, were written, not by illiterate Jewish peasants, but by Greek- 
spe^king ex-Pagan Fathers and priests far from the Holy Land of 
the Jews. 

There is another proof that the Gospels were not written by Jews. 
Traditionally, Jesus and all the "Apostles" were Jews ; all their as- 
sociates and the people of their country with whom they came into 
contact, were Jews. But throughout the Gospels, scores of times, "the 
Jews" are spoken of, always as a distinct and alien people from the 
writers, and mostly with a sense of racial hatred and contempt. A few 
instances only can be given ; they all betray that the writers were not 
Jews speaking of their fellow Jews. The Greek writer of '^Matthew" 
says : "this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this 
day" (Mt. xxviii, 15), showing, too, that it was written long after- 
wards ; a Jew must have said "among our people,** or some such. It is 
recorded by "Mark" : *Tor the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except 
they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding to the tradition of the 
elders" (Mk. vii, 3) ; no Jew writing for his fellow- Jews would explain 
or need to explain this Jewish custom, known to and practiced by "all 
the Jews." Luke names a Jew and locates geographically his place of 



residence : "Joseph, of Arimathea, a city of the Jews" ; an American 
writer, speaking of Hoboken, could not say "a city of the Americans" ; 
nor did Jews need to be told by a Jew that Arimathea was a "city of 
the Jews." The Greek priest who wrote "John" is the most prolific 
in telling his Pagan readers about Jewish customs and personalities ; 
absurd in a Jew writing for Jews : "After the manner of the purifying 
of the Jews" (ii, 6) ; "And the Jews' passover was at hand" (ii, 13) ; 
"Then answered the Jews, and said unto Jesus" (iii, 1) ; "Then there 
arose a question between some of John's disciples [all Jews] and 
the Jews about purifying" (iii, 25) ; "And therefore did the Jews 
persecute Jesus" (v, 16) ; "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill 
him" (v, 18). More : "And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh" 
vi, 4) ; no American would say "the Fourth of July, a holiday of the 
Americans," though a French writer might properly so explain. 
"After these things Jesus would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews 
sought to kill him" (vii, 1) ; "for they feared the Jews : for the Jews 
had agreed already" (ix, 22) ; "His disciples said unto him, Master, 
the Jews of late sought to stone thee with stones" (xi, 8) ; "As the 
manner of the Jews is to bury" (xix, 40), which need be explained 
to no Jew. These and many like passages prove that no Jews wrote 
the Gospels ; that they were written by foreigners for foreigners ; 
these foreigners were Greek-speaking aliens unfamiliar with Jewish 
customs ; the writers were therefore ex-Pagan Greek priests who were 
zealously "sellvng 99 the "glad tidings of great joy" to the ignorant 
and superstitious Pagan populace. 


The Four Gospels are thus demonstrated as : not written by Jews ; 
not written by any of the "Twelve Apostles" ; not written nor in exist- 
ence for over a century after the supposed Apostles. When finally the 
Gospel "according to" Luke came to be written, already, as "Luke" 
affirms, there were "many" other like pseudo-Apostolic Gospel- 
biographies of the Christ afloat (Luke, i, 1) ; he added just another. 
In his Commentary on Luke, Father Origen confirms this fact as well 
known : "And not four Gospels, but very many, out of which these we 
have chosen and delivered to the churches, we may perceive." (Origen, 
In Proem. Luc., Horn. 1, vol. 2, p. 210.) How, and why, out of half a 


hundred of other lying forgeries of Gospels, were these sacred Four 
finally "chosen" as truly "Apostolic," inspired, and canonical? No- 
body knows, as CE. confesses. 

It is a very strange and fatal confession, in view of the insistent 
false pretense of the Church for centuries of the patent Divinity of 
the Four Gospels, and of its own infallible inspiration and Divine 
guidance against all doubt and error ; but it confesses : 

"It is indeed impossible, at the present day, to describe the precise 
manner in which out of the numerous works ascribed to some Apostle, or 
simply bearing the name of gospel, only four, two of which are not ascribed 
to Apostles, came to be considered as sacred and canonical. It remains true, 
however, that all the early testimony which has a distinct bearing on the 
number of the canonical Gospels recognizes four such Gospels and none 
besides. Thus, Eusebius (d. 340) . . . Clement of Alexandria (d. about 
220), . . . and Tertullian (d. 220), were familiar with our four Gospels, 
frequently quoting and commenting on them." (CE. vi, 657.) 

The statement as to "all the early testimony" in favor of these 
Four only, is not only untrue, but it is contradicted by a true state- 
ment on the same page as the last above ; it is, too, a further humili- 
ating confession of blind and groping uncertainty with respect to the 
very foundation stones on which the Infallible Church is built, and 
makes a bit less confident the forged assurance that the Gates of Hell 
to say nothing of human Reason shall not yet prevail against 
the ill-founded structure. Here is the destructive admission : 

"In the writings of the Apostolic Fathers one does not, indeed, meet 
with unquestionable evidence in favor of only -four canonical gospels. . . . 
The canonical Gospels were regarded as of Apostolic authority, two of 
them being ascribed to the Apostles St. Matthew and St. John, respec- 
tively, and two to St. Mark and St. Luke, the respective companions of St. 
Peter and St. Paul. Many other gospels indeed claimed Apostolic authority, 
but to none of them was this claim universally allowed in the early Church. 
The only apocryphal work which was at all generally received, and relied 
upon, in addition to our four canonical Gospels, is the 'Gospel according to 
the Hebrews/ It is a well-known fact that St. Jerome regards it as the 
Hebrew original of our Greek Canonical Gospel according to St. Matthew." 
(CE. vi, 657.) 

Thus, admittedly, "numerous works" of pretended and false "gos- 
pels," some fifty, were forged and falsely "ascribed to some apostle" 



by devout Christians ; after a century and a half only four "came to 
be considered" and were finally "chosen" selected as of divine 
utterance and sanction. Why ? one may well wonder. 


Why Four Gospels, then, when only one would have been aplenty 
and much safer, as fewer contradictions out of the fifty ascribed 
by pious forging hands to the Holy Twelve? The pious Fathers are 
ready here, as ever, with fantastic reasons to explain things whereof 
they are ignorant or are not willing to give honest reasons for. "The 
saintly Bishop of Lyons," says CE. with characteristic clerical solem- 
nity when anyone else would laugh, "Irenaeus (died about 202), who 
had known Polycarp in Asia Minor, not only admits and quotes our 
four Gospels, [he is the very first to mention them !] but argues that 
there must be just four, no more and no less. He says : 'It is not pos- 
sible that the Gospels be either more or fewer than they are. For since 
there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal 
winds, while the Church is scattered throughout the world, . . . and 
the pillar and ground of the Church is the Gospel, . . . it is fitting that 
we should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side 
and vivifying our flesh. . . . The living creatures are quadriform, and 
the Gospel is quadriform, as is also the course followed by our Lord" ! 
{CE. vi, 659.) Thus far CE. quoting the good Bishop; but we may 
follow the Bishop a few lines further in his very innocent ratiocinations 
from ancient Hebrew mythology, in proof of the divine Four : 

"For this reason were four principal covenants given to the human race: 
One prior to the deluge, under Adam; the second, that after the deluge, 
under Noah; the third, the giving of the law, under Moses ; the fourth, that 
which renovates man, and sums up all things by means of the Gospel, rais- 
ing and bearing men upon its wings" into the heavenly Kingdom. . . . But 
that these Gospels alone are true and reliable, and admit neither an in- 
crease nor diminution of the aforesaid number, I have proved by so many 
and such arguments. For, since God made all things in due proportion and 
adaptation, it was fit also that the outward aspect of the Gospel should be 
well arranged and harmonized. The opinion of those men, therefore, who 
handed the Gospel down to us, having been investigated, from their very 
fountainheads, let us proceed also [to the remaining apostles], and in- 


quire into their doctrine with regard to God/' (Iren. Adv. Hcer. Ill, 
xi, 8, 9 ; ANF. i, 428-29.) 

The true reason, however, for four finally "chosen" and accepted 
Gospels, is that stated by Reinach, after quoting Irenaeus and other 
authorities : "The real reason was to satisfy each of the four princi- 
pal Churches each of which possessed its Gospel: Matthew at Jerusa- 
lem, Mark at Rome, or Alexandria, Luke at Antioch, and John at 
Ephesus." (Reinach, Orpheus 9 p. 217.) This reason for the use of a 
different Gospel by each of the principal and independent Churches, 
for the special uses of each of which the respective Gospels were no 
doubt worked up by forging Fathers in each Fold, is confirmed by 
Bishop Irenaeus himself in this same argument. Each of the four prin- 
cipal sects of heretics, he says, makes use in their Churches of one or 
the other of these Four for its own uses, for instance : Matthew by the 
Ebionites ; Mark by "those who separate Jesus from Christ' 5 ; Luke by 
the Marcionites ; and John by the Valentinians ; and this heretical use 
of the Four, argues the Bishop, confirms their like acceptance and 
use by the True Churches : "So firm is the ground upon which these 
Gospels rest, that the very heretics bear witness to them, and start- 
ing from these documents, each of them endeavors to establish his 
own peculiar doctrine [citing the use by each sect of a different 
Gospel as above named]. Since, then, our opponents do bear testimony 
to us, and make use of these documents, our proof derived from them 
is firm and true." (Iren., op. cit. sec. 7.) The "canonical Four," verily, 
as CE. confesses, were manufactured precisely for the purpose of 
meeting and confuting the heretics, as were the gradually developed 
and defined sacred dogmas of the Orthodox Church, even that of the 
Trinity. The fabrication of the Four can be seen working out under 
our very eyes, in the light of the foregoing statement of Irenaeus, 
and of that of CE. to be quoted. 

In the next section we shall see proven, that no written, Gospels 
existed until shortly before 185 A. D., when Irenaeus wrote; they are 
first mentioned in chapter xxii of his Book II ; the above quotation is 
from Book III, when use of them became constant. Evident we see it 
to be, from what Irenaeus has just said, that the sects of heretics 
named were making use, each of them of one of the just-published 



Four as well as of other "spurious gospels" ; the Orthodox claimed 
the Four as their own, and finally established the claim. The "gospel" 
up to about this time, a century and a half after Jesus Christ, was 
entirely oral and "traditional" ; the Gnostics and other heretics evi- 
dently were first to reduce some "gospels" to writing ; the Orthodox 
quickly followed suit, in order to combat the heretics by "apostolic" 
writings. This is clear from the following, that "the spurious gospels 
of the Gnostics prepared the way for the canon of Scripture," 
meaning, for the now "canonical Scripture" ; for, as the "canon" was 
not dogmatically established until 1546, the Four were not "canon- 
ized" when Irenaeus wrote in 185, when the "way was prepared" for 
them by the earlier heretical "spurious gospels." Thus CE. writes : 

"The endless controversies with heretics have been indirectly the cause 
of most important doctrinal developments and definitions formulated by 
councils to the edification of the body of Christ. Thus the spurious gospels 
of the Gnostics prepared the way for the canon of Scripture: the Patri- 
passian, Sabellian, Arian, and Macedonian heresies drew out a clearer 
concept of the Trinity; the Nestorian and Eutychian errors led to definite 
dogmas on the nature and Person of Christ. And so on down to Modernism, 
which has called forth a solemn assertion of the claims of the supernatural 
in history." (CE. vii, 261.) 

Heresy means "Choice" ; heretics are those who choose what they 
will believe, or whether they will believe at all. It was to foreclose all 
choice on the part of believers, that the divinely-inspired, apostolic 
fictions of the Four Gospels were drawn up for the first time to com- 
bat the "spurious gospels" of the free choosers. Heresy could not 
exist in the time of Jesus Christ, for Tie laid down nothing for belief 9 
except "He that believeth on me shall be saved" against his imme- 
diate "second coming" and end of the world. The gospels are thus 
anti-heretical documents of the second century, after Gnosticism first 

In this connection it may be mentioned, as complained by Augus- 
tine, that there were some 93 sects of heretics during the first three 
centuries of the Christian Faith ; all these were Christian sects, be- 
lieving in the tales of Jesus Christ and him crucified, but each of them 
as rivals struggling for the profits and power of religion and warring 
to suppress all others and make itself master in pelf and power. Hence 


the Fathers thundered against the heretics. The inspired Four Gos- 
pels, contradictory at every point, were impossible to believe in all 
points ; they left every one free to disbelieve all, or to believe such as 
he could. 

So incredible, even on their face, were one and all of these canonical 
Four Gospels, that the fanatic Father Tertullian thus stated the 
grounds of his holy faith in them: "Credo qwa incredibilis est I be- 
lieve because it is unbelievable 9 ' ; and St. Augustine, greatest of the 
Fathers, declared himself in these terms : "Ego vero Evangelio non 
crederem, nisi me Catholicce Ecclesice conmoveret Auctoritas. . . . 
Ego me ad eos teneam, quibus prcecipientibus Evangelio credidi I 
would not believe the Gospel true, unless the authority of the Cath- 
olic Church constrained me. ... I hold myself bound to those, 
through whose teachings I have believed the Gospel. 5 ' (Augustine, On 
tlie Foundation, sec. 5, Ed. Vives, vol. xxv, p. 435 ; Orpheus, p. 223.) 

In the work often cited, Bishop Irenaeus either falsely quotes the 
Gospel of Mark, or the sacred text has been seriously altered in our 
present copies ; he says : "Mark commences with a reference to the 
prophetical spirit, saying, *The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus 
Christ, as it is written in Esaias the prophet' " (sec. 8, p. 428), as if 
Isaiah testified to the Gospel. The Bishop also quotes two long pas- 
sages, one a written letter of the Apostles "unto those brethren from 
among the Gentiles who are in Antioch, and Syria, and Silicia, greet- 
ing," which are not in the Acts of the Apostles or any other New 
Testament book as we now have them. (Iren., Adv. Hasr. HI, xi, 14 ; 
p. 436.) The good Bishop seems either to have fabricated this alleged 
Epistle and passage, or other pious hands falsified the sacred Scrip- 
tures by forging them out of its pages. So it is evident that these in- 
spired booklets, as we now know them, at least differ in very many 
material respects from the "traditional Gospel" and from the form 
in which the Four Gospels were first reduced to writing. Many other 
instances exist, of which some of the most notorious will be shown 
in the course of the chapter. 


In this connection a few words may be said as to the chronological 
order and manner of composition of the first three or Synoptic Gos- 



pels. "Historically Mark is the earliest, and its study the foundation 
of critical enquiry. But the ordinary Christian is not a historical 
critic." (New Commentary, Ft. Ill, p. 126; cf. pp. 33, 45.) With the 
latter statement all will agree ; with the first CE. is in agreement with 
the leading critics, though holding to the exploded "tradition" that 
one Mark wrote "Mark," or, in its words : "7f, then, a consistent and 
widespread early tradition is to count for anything, St. Mark wrote a 
work based upon St. Peter's Preaching." (CE. ix, 676.) The later 
writers of "Matthew" and "Luke" copied bodily from "Mark," with 
the utmost literality in many places, but with the greatest freedom of 
changes, additions and suppressions at others, to suit their own pur- 
poses. But one comparison, that between "Mark" and "Matthew," can 
here be given ; the method extends quite as notably to "Luke." Thus 
CE. discloses the process : "Mark is found complete in Matthew, with 
the exception of numerous slight omissions and the following peric- 
opes. ... In all, 31 verses are omitted"; and so with respect to 
the "analogies" with the other two. "Parts peculiar to Matthew are 
numerous, as Matthew has 330 verses that are distinctly his own." 
(CE. x, 60, 61 ; cf . for thorough examination, New Comm. Pt. Ill, 
pp. 33, seq.) "These 'Matthean additions, 5 as they are called, . . . 
seem to be authentic when they relate our Lord's words ; but, when 
they relate incidents, they are extremely questionable." (New Comm. 
Pt. Ill, p. 127-128.) 

We have just seen the same authority admit the want of authen- 
ticity of one set of words imputed by Matthew to his Lord ; our next 
section will demonstrate another famous "Matthean addition" to be 
a gross and bungling forgery. This bodily copying from Mark, with so 
many "additions and suppressions," implies, as we have seen, "a very 
free treatment of the text of Mark in Matthew and Luke (a freedom 
which reaches a climax in the treatment of Mk. x, 17f. in Mt. xix, 
16f.). . . . Just as the latter (Matthew) tampered more with the 
Markan order than St. Luke did." (New Comm. Pt. Ill, 36, 40.) But 
this textual tampering is well explained, for clerical apologists : "Nor 
need such freedom surprise us. Mark, at the time when the others used 
it, had not attained anything like the status of Scripture, and an evan- 
gelist using it would feel free, or might indeed feel bound, to bring its 


contents into line with the traditions of the particular Church in 
which he lived and worked'' 9 ! (16. p. 36.) 

This perfectly confirms the position taken in the section "Why 
Four Gospels?" that these Gospels were framed up each in a different 
Church, to meet its own uses and special purposes, and in answer to 
the "gospels" of the Heretics. "Mark," being first in order, was prob- 
ably in the hands of several Churches, some of whose "traditions" did 
not accord with the "gospel" narratives therein retailed ; the local 
gospel-mongers, therefore, taking "Mark" as good "copy" for a start, 
took their blue-pencil styluses in hand and "edited" its text by pro- 
fuse "tampering" until they produced, severally, the "gospels accord- 
ing to" Matthew and Luke, for use in more "orthodox" and approved 
form according to the local traditions. The "John" gospel-fabrication 
alone of the Four quite disregarded the "Mark" document, and is in 
the most complete contradiction with it, and with all the first three. 
The "Big Four" gradually won their way against and were "chosen" 
from all the other fifty or more in circulation, which then became 
"apocrypha," or admitted forgeries. 


We have seen the admissions of CE. that the earliest notice of the 
Four Gospels now known to us was towards the close of the second 
century, quoting as the earliest witnesses the African Bishops, Clement 
of Alexandria and Tertullian, both of whom died about 220 A. D. It 
presents, however, one earlier witness to Gospels going in the name of 
the Four: "Irenaeus, in his work Against Heresies (A. D, 182-188), 
testified to the existence of a Tetramorph, or Quadrifonn Gospel, 
given by the Word and unified by one Spirit," (CE. iii, 275), of 
which we have just had occasion to admire his quaint and cogent 
proofs. This first mention, by Irenaeus, of Four Gospels, with the 
names of their supposed writers, we shall in a moment quote ; first we 
will get the record in honest and correct form by citing an even 
earlier partial naming of something like Gospels, and their reputed 

1. Bishop Papias, about 145 A. D., is the very first namer of some- 



thing like written "Gospels" and writers ; and this is what he says, 
quoting his anonymous gossipy old friends, the presbyters : 

"And the presbyter said this. MARK having become the interpreter 
of PETER, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, 
however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For 
he neither heard the Lord, nor accompanied him. . . . For one thing he 
took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put any- 
thing fictitious into the statements. MATTHEW put the Oracles (of the 
Lord) in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he 
could." (Papias, quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii, 39; ANF. i, 154-5.) 

Here, then, over one hundred years after Christ, we have the first 
mention of written gospels and of Mark, and the recital, by hearsay 
on hearsay, that he wrote down "whatsoever he remembered" that 
Peter had said the Lord had said and done. This is rather a far cry 
from divine inspiration of inerrant truth in this first hearsay by mem- 
ory recital of the supposed Gospel-writers. Thus "Mark" is admit- 
tedly not "inspired, 95 but is hearsay, haphazard "traditions," pieced 
together a generation and more afterwards by some unknown priestly 
scribe. But note well, even if Mark may have written some things, al- 
leged as retailed by Peter, yet this is not, and is not an intimation even 
remotely, that this by-memory record of Mark is the "Gospel accord- 
ing to Mark" which half a century after Papias came to be known. 
Indeed, such an idea is expressly excluded ; Mark's notes were "not in 
exact order," but here and there, as remembered ; while the "Gospel 
according to Mark" is, or purports to be, very orderly, proceeding 
from "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ" orderly and con- 
secutively through to his death, resurrection and ascension. It includes 
the scathing rebuke administered by the Christ to Peter : "Get thee 
behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God" 
(Mk. viii, 33) ; one may be sure that Peter never related these emi- 
nently deserved "sayings of Christ 55 to Mark or to anyone. 

Moreover, the present "Gospel according to Mark 55 relates the 
crucifixion of Jesus at about thirty years of age, after one year's 
ministry ; which is wholly false, as Jesus died at home in bed of old age, 
in effect says Bishop Papias, on the "tradition 55 of these same pres- 
byters. So, every other consideration here aside, Papias is not a wit- 
ness to "The Gospel according to Mark. 55 As for Matthew, Papias 


simply reports the elders as saying that Matthew wrote down the 
"ORACLES" or words of the Lord, and in Hebrew; the "Gospel ac- 
cording to Matthew" is much more than mere "words of the Lord" ; 
it is the longest and most palpably fictitious of the "Lives" of the 
Christ ; it was written in Greek, and very obviously by a Greek priest 
or Father, many years after the reputed time of Jesus Christ. And 
Bishop Papias, more than a century after Christ, did not have in his 
important church, and had never seen, these alleged apostolic writings, 
and only knew of some such by the gossip of the elders at second or 
third hand. So we must count Papias out as a witness for these two 
of our written Gospels. None of the present Four Gospels was thus in 
existence in about A. D. 145. And it is obvious that, even by "tradi- 
tion," the Gospels in the names of Luke and John did not exist in the 
time of Papias. 

2. Justin Martyr (145-149) quotes sundry "sayings" of Jesus 
which we find here and there in the present Four, just as like alleged 
"sayings" identically are to be found in almost any of the confessedly 
forged or apocryphal gospels ; but he names no names nor Gospels, 
but only says "memoires of the apostles," or simply "it is said." (See 
all instances cited, in EB. ii, 1819.) So Justin is no witness to our 
present Four Gospels, which evidently did not exist in his time about 
150 years after Jesus Christ, though he assiduously quotes the 
Sibyl and the heathen gods as proofs of Jesus Christ, as we have seen. 

3. Irenseus (182-188) makes the very first mention of Four Gos- 
pels and names the reputed authors. These are textually the interest- 
ing, and as we shall see, at least in part, spurious words of Bishop 
Irenseus : 

"Matthew also issued a Gospel [see it grow Papias said only 
"oracles of the Lord"] among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while 
Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations 
of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and inter- 
preter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been 
preached by Peter, Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a 
book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of 
the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a 
Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia*" (Iren. Adv. Hcer. 
Bk. IH, Ch. l,iiANF. i, 414.) 



Irenaeus, therefore, about the year 185 of our Lord, to use a me- 
dium date, or some one hundred and fifty years after his death, is the 
first of all the zealous Christ-bearers to record the fact that, at the 
time he wrote, there were in existence four wonderful biographies or 
histories of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, two under the names 
of holy Apostles, and, he "implies that the Gospels of Mark and Luke 
were, in effect, apostolic, as being written by companions of Peter and 
Paul." (EB. i, 1830.) If any such apostolic and authentic works had 
been in existence before the years, we will say, 150180 A.I>., it is be- 
yond comprehension and possibility that the zealous Fathers, who 
so eagerly quoted, and misquoted, the Old Testament and its apoc- 
rypha, the forged New Testament apocrypha, and the heathen Or- 
acles, in proof of their Christ, should have been silent as clams about 
the apostolic Jesus-histories "according to" Matthew, Mark, Luke 
and John. Even all the later Fathers, and ecclesiastical writers, and 
the CE. 9 admittedly are unable to trace their genealogy further back 
into "the age of apocryphal literature" than about 150 A. D. or 
later. It is impossible, therefore, to believe or to pretend, that these 
Four Gospels were written by apostles and their personal disciples, 
some hundred years and more before they were ever heard of by the 
zealous and myth-mongering Fathers. A confused medley of alleged 
words and wonderful deeds of the -Christ, handed down by ancient tra- 
dition or new-invented for any occasion, existed in oral "tradition," 
and were worn threadbare by rote repetition ; but never a written word 
of the Four for a century and a half after the apostles had their say, 
and had handed down that wonderful and inexhaustible "Deposit of 
Faith,." which, oral and unedited, is yet drawn upon until this day 
by the inspired Successors of Peter for their every new Dogma. 

One may turn the thousands of pages of the Ante-Nicene Fathers 
before Irenaeus in vain to find a direct word of quotation from writ- 
ten Gospels, nor (except as above recorded) even bare mention of the 
names of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, as writers of Gospels. The 
above words of Irenaeus are registered in his Book HI, chapter i ; in 
the first two Books, while, like Justin, he quotes "sayings" which are 
to be found in our present texts, as in the apocryphas, he does not 
mention "Gospel" or any of the four reputed evangelists, until chap- 
ter xxii of Book II, where he mentions the word "Gospels" and those 


of John and Luke, and assails their record of the early death of 
Jesus as "heresy." But beginning with chapter x of Book III, he 
bristles with the names of and direct quotations from all Four ; and 
so 'with all the following Fathers. It seems, therefore, a fair inference 
that Irenaeus had just heard of these Four Gospels at the time the 
last chapters of the second of the two Books were composed ; and that 
they came into existence, or to his knowledge, just before the time he 
began to compose Book III. And certainly these Four Gospels could 
not have been in existence and circulation very long before they would 
come to the eager hands of the active and prolific Bishop of Lyons, who 
had recently come from the tutelage of his friend Poly carp, "disciple 
of the Apostle John" venerable Bishop of Smyrna, who sent him to 
Lyons, and who, for his part, shows not a suspicion of knowledge of 
them. And these Gospels, just now come into existence, were imme- 
diately and fiercely attacked by Bishop Irenaeus as false and "heresy" 
in the vital points of the crucifixion and early death of Jesus, who, says 
the Bishop, lived to very old age, even maybe till the times of Trajan, 
98117, as vouched for by the Apostle John and other apostles and by 
the [oral] "Gospel." This, too, casts discredit on these Gospels as 
containing authentic record of the apostolic "traditions," condemned 
in this vital particular by the only two Bishops, Papias and Irenaeus, 
who for a century and a half mention any Gospel-writings at all. 

Moreover, at the time that the Gospel bearing the name of Luke 
was published, already many Gospels or purported histories and say- 
ings of Jesus Christ were in active circulation : "Forasmuch as many 
have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things 
which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered them 
unto us, which from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers 
of the word ; it has seemed to me good also, having had a perfect un- 
derstanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee, in 
order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the cer- 
tainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed." (Luke, i, 
1-4). Now, these "many" Gospels were clearly not by any of the 
apostles, else Luke would certainly have so stated; they were not 



"inspired" writings, but they were by sundry anonymous "eye- 
witnesses and ministers of the word" ; they are either totally lost to 
posterity, or are among the fifty admittedly forged and apocryphal 
Gospels which we have previously noticed. Thus we see two of the 
"Pour," i. e., "Mark," and "Luke" are, on their face, uninspired, hear- 
say, and long ex post -facto. 

That neither apostle nor contemporary of Jesus wrote a line of 
"gospel" is thus perfectly evidenced by Luke : "According to the pro- 
logue of Luke, no eye-witness of the life of Jesus took pen in hand 
none at least appear to have produced any writings which Luke would 
have called a 'narrative.' " (EB. ii, 1892.) These conclusions are 
confirmed by the learned clerical translators and editors of the ANF, 
respectively, as follows : 

"Though a few of the Apocryphal Gospels are of comparatively early 
origin, there is no evidence that any Gospels purporting to be what our 
Four Gospels are, existed in the first century, or that any other than frag- 
mentary literature of this character existed even in the second century." 
(Ed. note to Apocrypha of the New Testament, ANF. viii, 349.) "There 
is abundant evidence of the existence of many of these traditions' in the 
second century, though it cannot be made out that any of the books were 
then in existence in their present form." (Translator's Introductory No- 
tice to Apocryphal Gospels, ANF. viii, 351.) 

Such apocryphal gospels would naturally contain as they do 
many of the same reputed words and deeds of the Christ as those now 
reported by Luke and the others ; many are indeed in large sections 
in the very same words. Luke does not say or imply that these "many" 
were false, but, on the contrary, being by alleged "eye-witnesses" they 
were necessarily more or less the same things which Luke undertook, 
not to belie or correct, but simply to repeat in good order for the 
edification of his friend Theophilus. It is very significant, for the date 
of the authorship of "Luke," to note the fact that the only Theophilus 
known to early Church history is a certain ex-Pagan by that name, 
who, after becoming Christian, and very probably before being in- 
structed in the certainty of the faith by "Luke," himself turned Chris- 
tian instructor and Father, and wrote the Tract, in three Books, 
under the title Epistle to Antotychus, preserved in the Collection of 
Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. ii, pp. 89-121. This Theophilus became 


Bishop of Antioch about 169-177 A. D. (CE. xiv, 625) ; and thus il- 
luminates the date of "Luke. 55 

That these Four Gospels, then, are forgeries, falsely ascribed to 
Apostles and their companions, a century and a half after Christ and 
the apostles, and were compounded of very conflicting "traditions" 
and out of the existing 50 or more forgeries circulating in apostolic 
names is proven as positively as negative proofs permit, and "be- 
yond a reasonable doubt" which is proof ample for conviction of 
capital crime. 

Most people, says Bishop Papias, took pleasure in "voluminous 
falsehoods" in reporting or writing of Jesus Christ and his life and 
deeds, for which reason, says the Bishop, he was driven to "the living 
voice of tradition" for his own accounts, samples of which we have 
seen. These fanciful and distorted oral traditions, finally reduced into 
some fifty fantastic written records of "voluminous falsehoods," were 
later, about the time of Book III of Bishop Irenaeus, crystallized into 
four documents, one each of which was held by one of the principal 
churches as its authoritative biography of the Christ, or "gospel" ; to 
which, the titles "According to" Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, were 
tacked for pretended apostolic sanction. 

The truth of the late second century origin of the Gospels and 
Epistles may be garnered from the guarded words of a standard 
theological textbook on Christian Evidences : "The Christian litera- 
ture which has survived from the latter part of the first century and 
the beginning of the second is scanty and fragmentary [which could 
not be true if the Gospels and Epistles had then existed]. But when 
we come into the light of the last quarter of the second century, we 
find the Gospels of the canon in undisputed possession of the field." 
(The Grounds of Theistic and Christian BeUef, by George Parker 
Fisher, D.D., LL.D. ; 1902.) 

Summarizing the results of critical study of the four Gospels, upon 
all the evidences, internal and external, which are there fully reviewed, 
the conclusions of modern Biblical scholarship are thus recorded by 
the Encyclopedia Biblica: 

As to Matthew: "The employment of various sources, the characteristic 
difference of the quotations from the LXX (Septuagint) and the original 
(Hebrew), the indefiniteness of the determinations of time and place, the 



incredibleness of the contents, the introduction of later conditions, as 
also the artificial arrangement, and so forth, have long since led to the 
conclusion that for the authorship of the first Gospel the apostle Matthew 
must be given up." (EB. ii, 1891.) 

As to Mark: "According to Papias, the second gospel was written by 
Mark. ... In what Papias says the important point is not so much the 
statement that Mark wrote the gospel as the further statement that Peter 
supplied the contents orally. . , . The supposition that the gospel is essen- 
tially a repetition of oral communications by Peter, will at once fall to the 
ground. . . . Should Mark have written in Aramaic, then he cannot 
be held to have been the author of canonical Mark, which is certainly not 
a translation, nor yet, in view of the LXX quotations which have passed 
over into all three gospels, can he be held to have been the author of the 
original Mark." (EB. ii, 1891.) 

As to Luke: "This tradition [that Luke was the author of the third gos- 
pel and of Acts] cannot be traced farther back than towards the end of the 
second century (Irenseus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and the 
Muratorian fragment). ... It has been shown that it is impossible to 
regard Luke with any certainty as the writer even of the 'we' sections of 
Acts, not to speak of the whole book of Acts, or of the Third Gospel. . . . 
If Luke cannot have been the author of Acts, neither can he have been the 
author of the Third Gospel." (EB. ii, 1893, 2831.) 

As to John: "No mention of the Fourth Gospel which we can recognize 
as such carries us further than to 140 A. D. As late as 152, Justin, who never- 
theless lays so great value upon the 'Memorabilia of the Apostles,' regards 
John if indeed he knows it at all with distrust, and appropriates from 
it a very few sayings. . . . If on independent grounds some period shortly 
before 140 A. D. can be set down as the approximate date of the production 
of the gospel [a certain statement in itds explained], . . . The Apostolic 
authorship of the gospel remains impossible, and that not merely from the 
consideration that it cannot be the son of Zebedee who has introduced 
himself as writer in so remarkable a fashion, but also from the consideration 
that it cannot be an eye-witness of the facts of the life of Jesus who has pre- 
sented, as against the synoptists, an account so much less credible, nor an 
original apostle who has shown himself so readily accessible to Alexandrian 
and Gnostic ideas, nor a contemporary of Jesus who survived so late into 
the second century and yet was capable of composing so profound a 
work." (EB. ii, 2550, 2553.) 

None of these Four Gospels, then, being of apostolic authorship or 
even of the apostolic age, but anonymous productions of over a cen- 
tury after the apostles, all are exactly of like origin and composition 
as all the other fifty apocryphal Jesus-writings : the Four "do not, in 


point of fact, rest upon any real difference in tlie character or origin 
of the writings concerned," from all the other fifty admittedly apoc- 
ryphal and forged gospels dating about the middle of the second cen- 
tury, at the height of the Christian age of apocryphal literature. 
They are therefore late Christian forgeries of the Catholic Church. 


That the Four Gospels, as we have them, are very late productions, 
issued in the names of apostles a century and more dead, and are 
therefore forgeries, is now proven beyond peradventure. That they 
are not, even in the form that Bishop Irenaeus first knew them, each 
the work of one inspired mind and pen, is as readily and conclusively 
provable. They are, each and all Four, clumsy compilations framed 
by different persons and at very different times, as is patent on their 
face ; they are thus concatenations of forgeries within forgeries. This 
we shall now demonstrate. 

The Church claims these Four -Gospels to be apostolic and divine 
works, and together with all the other books of the Trentine Bible, to 
be throughout divinely inspired, having God himself for their Author. 
This 1546 Dogma of the Infallible Church has been thus reaffirmed by 
the Sacred Vatican Council (A. D. 1870) : 

"These books are sacred and canonical because they contain revelation 
without error, and because, written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, 
they have God for their Author." (CE. ii, 543.) 

More recently, Pope Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Prov. Deus. 
(1893), thus reaffirms the plenary inspiration and inerrancy of Holy 

"It will never be lawful to restrict inspiration merely to certain portions 
of the Holy Scriptures, or to grant that the sacred writers could have made 
a mistake. . . . They render in exact language, with infallible truth, all 
that God commanded, and nothing else" ! (I&.) 

For the Protestant sects the notion of divine inspiration and in- 
errant truth of Scripture excepting always the dozen and more of 
Old Testament "apocryphal" Books and parts, as Tobias and the 
history of the Assyrian great god Bel cwd the Dragon, a typical 



profession is that of the first Article of the Baptist Declaration of 
Faith : "The Hoi j Bible was written by men divinely inspired, . . . 
and is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction. ... It has God for 
its Author, and truth without any admixture of error for its matter." 
All this priestly "confidence stuff" must remind one of what Cicero 
said of the Roman augurs. Even CE. y valiant but often perplexed de- 
fender of the orthodox Faith, can not give full credit to that inspired 
canard, which even the infallible authors of it could not have them- 
selves believed. Timorously "reasoning in chains" and minimizing the 
truth, the orthodox apologist, forced by scholarly criticism, con- 
f esses* utterly belying Council and Holiness: 

"In all the Bible, where the same event is several times narrated by the 
same writer, or narrated by several writers, there is some slight [sic'} diver- 
gency, as it is natural there should be with those who spoke or wrote from 
memory. Divine inspiration covers the substance of the narration." (CE. 

Those sacred writers, putting on papyrus rolls from errant and 
therefore necessarily uninspired "memory," their intimate familiar- 
ities with the thoughts and desires, purposes and providences of God, 
make not "some slight divergencies" from accurate recording of the 
promptings of the Spirit to them ; they committed incessant contra- 
dictions of so gross a nature as to impeach and destroy the possibility 
of truth and credibility of virtually every word they said or wrote 
"in all the Bible," Old and New Testaments alike. I have so fully ex- 
posed some thousands of these glaring and self-destroying contradic- 
tions in my previous work, that here I simply notice only those most 
vital ones which are pertinent and incidental to our present subject of 
apostolic forgeries. 

In a work accompanying the Revised Version of the Bible, in which 
the Revisers pointed out some 30,000 (now over 150,000) variant 
readings in the New Testament, the reverend author makes this naive 
explanation : "In regard to the New Testament, no miracle has been 
wrought to preserve the text as it came from the pens of the inspired 
writers. That would have been a thing altogether out of harmony with 
God's method of governing the world"! (Dr. Alex. Roberts, Com- 
pamon to the Revised Version, p. 4.) One may wonder at the writer's 


intimacy with God's governmental methods, as well as at God's 
indifference to the preservation of his miraculously-revealed Holy 
Word, so awfully necessary to save us from eternal damnation ; when, 
as we shall see, by special miraculous intervention and providence he 
has, the Church vouches, preserved wholly "incorrupt" through the 
Ages of Faith countless whole cadavers and ghastly scraps and mi- 
raculous relics galore of the unwashed Saints of Holy Church. 


No more compelling proofs of forgery in a document can well be 
than glaring contradictions between two parts of the text. Remember 
that in the "age of apocryphal literature" there were no printed 
books, thus fixing the text, and no "copyright" existed. All books, 
sacred and profane, were manuscripts, tediously written by hand on 
rolls of papyrus or sheets of parchment-skin ; like the manuscripts of 
the Gospels, Epistles, etc., they were usually unsigned and undated, 
and frequently gave no clue to the anonymous writers. When one man 
came into possession of a manuscript which he desired, he sat down 
and copied it by hand, or employed slaves or professional copyists to 
do the labor. There was absolutely no check against errors of copy- 
ing, or intentional omissions, alterations or insertions into the text, 
to suit the taste or purpose of the copyist. Religious books were writ- 
ten, and copied, by priests, monks or Fathers ; religious notions and 
doctrines were very diversely held, and developed or were modified in- 
cessantly. Traditions of what was said or done by Jesus Christ and 
the apostles were, we have seen, very variant and conflicting. Very 
often, as we shall see, conflicting traditions or accounts are found in 
the same book. As no honest writer of intelligence and care would put 
into one -short work which he is writing, two totally contradictory 
statements regarding the same fact, the only way in which such con- 
tradictions can occur in what purports to be an original or genuine 
manuscript, is by the intentional insertion by a later copyist of the 
new and contradictory material, euphoniously called "interpolations" 
(CE. iv, 498, post), without the critical sense to perceive the con- 
tradiction, and omit the original statement with which his addition 



Father Tertullian, in his work Against Heresies, denying that 
Christians do such things do not need to, he says, because the Scrip- 
tures are favorable to the Orthodox, accuses the Heretics of such 
practices, and naively explains how such interpolations or forgeries 
of test are done, and why they needs must be : 

"All interpolation must be believed to be a later process. . . . One 
man perverts the Scriptures with his hand, another their meaning by 
his exposition. . . . Unquestionably, the Divine Scriptures are more 
fruitful in resources of all kinds for this sort of facility [of introduc- 
ing interpolations]. Nor do I risk contradiction in saying that the 
very Scriptures were even arranged by the will of God in such a man- 
ner as to furnish materials for heretics, inasmuch as I read that 'there 
must be heresies 5 (I Cor. xi, 19), which there cannot be without Scrip- 
tures"! (Praes. xxxviii-xxxix ; ANF. iii, 262.) Speaking of instances 
related to the birth of Jesus Christ, EB. makes a remark, which it ex- 
tends to others, and is generally applicable to the conflicting Gospel 
narratives : 

"From the nature of the case both canonical narratives were ac- 
cepted by faith and incorporated with each other. The gospels them- 
selves supply ample justification of a criticism of the gospel narratives. 
In spite of all the revisions which the gospels received before they be- 
came canordcally faced, they still not unf requently preserve references 
to conditions which are irreconcilable with the later additions." (US. 
iii, 3343, 3344.) 

"For Christian orthodoxy, 55 says the same authority, Vreconcil- 
ability of the two canonical accounts was always a necessary dogma" ; 
and on this point, the orthodox CE. makes a quaint but typically 
clerical argument, in effect that the confessed contradictions of Holy 
Writ make it all the more credible : "As can readily be seen, varia- 
tions are naturally to be expected in four distinct, and in many 
ways independent, accounts of Christ's words and deeds, so that 
their presence, instead of going against, rather makes for the sub- 
stantial value of the evangelical narratives"! (CE. vi, 659.) Fanci- 
ful and disingenuous as this is, and derogatory of the Papal theory 
that it is no* possible that "the sacred writers could have made a mis- 
take," the argument loses even its rhetorical force when we find the 
most monumental contradictions in the inspired words of the same 


writer in the same inspired little book. We will notice some of the most 
obvious and fatal forgeries by "interpolations" into the Gospd 


The Jews, in their "canonical,** more definitely in their apocryphal 
or admittedly forged Scriptures, expected a "Messiah," or anointed 
King of the race and lineage of David, who should deliver them from 
the rule of their enemies, at the time of the Gospel tales, the Romans ; 
previously, the Assyrians, Persians, and Greeks, successively. This 
King, says Isaiah, shall sit and reign "upon the throne of David, and 
upon his kingdom, to establish it" (Isa. ix, 7) ; and that this prophecy 
was in order of fulfillment, Gabriel the Angel announced to Mary the 
Ever-Virgin Mother of eight sons and daughters : "Thou shalt bring 
forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus ; and the Lord God shall 
give unto him the throne of his father David : And he shall reign over 
the house of Jacob forever." (Lk. i, 32, 33.) There is not a word of 
"prophecy" anywhere that this King should be divine, a Son of the 
Ged of Israel ; he was to be a human king of the house of Jacob, of 
David. There were many false pretenders to the still vacant Messiah- 
ship, and even Jesus was not the last to proclaim himself the Messiah 
or Christ : "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ ; and 
shall deceive many." (Mt. xxiv, 4, 23, 24 ; Mk. xiii, 6, 21, 22.) 

That this Messiah Jesus who was come was mere man, but instinct 
with the spirit of God, is positively avowed by both Peter and Paul. 
Says Peter in his first sermon at Pentecost : *TTe men of Israel, hear 
these words : Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you 
[etc. ] . The patriarch David . . . therefore being a prophet, and know- 
ing that God had sworn mth an oath to him, that of the fruit of his 
lows according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit upon his 
throne." (Acts, ii, 22, 29, 30.) And Paul: "There is one God, and 
one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 
ii, 5) ; and again: " Jesus Christ of the seed of David" (2 Tim. ii, 8). 
Therefore, in the times when the two cited sacred books were, by whom- 
ever, written, Jesus was at that time regarded simply as a man, a 
"son" or descendant of David. So, when, many years later, the Gos- 



pels "according to" Matthew and Luke came to be by whomever writ- 
ten, in their original form Jesus Christ was mere man. 

Matthew's first chapter begins very humanly and explicitly : "The 
book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of 
Abraham" ; and Matthew gives an unbroken line of human begettings, 
father of son, until "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, 
of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ" ! (Matt, i, 1-16.) And 
Matthew names and catalogues twenty-eight generations between 
David and Jesus, to-wit : David, Solomon . . . Jacob, Joseph, Jesus, 
a purely human ancestry. Also Luke still reflected the belief, held 
at the time he wrote, that Jesus was of human ancestry ; he gives his 
human genealogy all the way back to Adam, and through many mythi- 
cal patriarchs who assuredly never existed. This human genealogy by 
Luke vastly differs, however, from that of Matthew; instead of 
twenty-eight generations from David, through Solomon . . . Jacob 
and Joseph, our Luke genealogist makes out in detail forty-two gener- 
ations, to wit : David, Nathan, . . . Heli, Joseph, Jesus ; and only 
three of the intermediate names are the same in the two lists. So one 
or the other of the two inspired genealogies is fictitious, false and 
forged, necessarily : both are, of course, if Jesus was not the son of 
David, but the immediate "Son of God." The truth is thus stated: 
"The genealogy could not have been drawn up after Joseph ceased 
to be regarded as the real father of Jesus" (EB. iii, 2960.) 

And CE. thus scraps the inspired genealogy of Luke : "The arti- 
ficial character of Luke's genealogy may be seen in the following table 
[copying Luke's list] . . . The artificial character" is shown by de- 
tails cited. (CE. vi, 411.) It also explodes the seventeenth century 
clerical pretense, heard often today in attempted explanation of 
these glaring contradictions, that one or the other of these sacred 
genealogies, preferably that of Luke, was the genealogy, not of Joseph, 
but of Mary: "It may be safely said that patristic tradition does not 
regard St. Luke's list as representing the genealogy of the Blessed 
Virgin." (CE. vi, 411.) And, as CE. itself points out, Mary is not 
mentioned as in the line of descent from David in either list. To bring 
her into the genealogy, in one list or the other, it must have been writ- 
ten : "And Jacob begat Mary the wife of Joseph," instead of "And 


Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary" : or "And Jesus . . . being 
... the son of Mary, which was the daughter of Heli," instead of the 
recorded "the son of Joseph (as was supposed) , which was the son of 
Heli" (Luke iii, 22-31). Both the genealogies are false and forged 
lists of mostly fictitious names, in the original Gospel-forgeries, fabri- 
cated to prove Jesus a direct son or descendant of David, and thus 
to fulfill the terms of the pretended prophecies that the human Messiah 
should be of the race and lineage of David the king. 

Moreover, Joseph and Mary both knew nothing of the Holy- 
Ghostly paternity of their child Jesus. The celebrated Angelic "An- 
nunciation" of this Fable to the "prolific yet ever-virgin Mother of 
God," recorded by Dr. Luke (i, 28), is itself a forgery y admits CE.: 
"The words : 'Blessed art thou among women* (v. 28) are spwriow 
and taken from verse 42, the account of the Visitation . . . [Add- 
ing] The opinion that Joseph at the time of the Annunciation was an 
aged widower and Mary 12 or 15 years of age, is founded only upon 
apocryphal documents" like all the rest of these Fables of Christ. 
(CE. i, 542.) Simeon came into the temple when Joseph and Mary 
had brought the child there "to do for him after the custom of the 
law," and indulged in some ecstasies which would have been quite 
intelligible if Gabriel had made the revelations attributed to him; 
but, hearing them, "Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things 
which were spoken of him" (Lk. ii, 33). It is false, the original says: 
"His father and his mother marvelled." etc. Here is another holy 
forgery stuck into Luke ii, as is the later verse, "and Joseph and 
his mother knew not of it" (v. 43). The true original reads "and 
his parents knew not of it," just as in verse 41 ; "Now his parents 
went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover" ; and as 
in verse 48, "thy -father and I have sought thee sorrowing." In 
"John," Jesus is twice expressly called the son of Joseph; Philip says 
to Nathaniel, "We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the 
prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph" (i, 45) ; 
and again : "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph* whose -father and 
mother we know?" (vi, 42) ; all which "convincingly proves that in 
the mind of the narrator Joseph and Mary were and knew themselves 
to be, in the natural sense of the words, the parents of Jesus." (EB- 



iii, 3344.) The same authority thus sums up the whole of the New 
Testament evidence prior to the "interpolations" of miraculous 
birth : "The remark has long ago and often been made that, like Paul, 
even the Gospels themselves know nothing of the miraculous birth of 
our Saviour. On the contrary, their knowledge of his natural filial 
relationship to Joseph the carpenter, and to Mary, his wife, is still 
explicit." (Ibid.) And if Jesus had been a God he could hardly have 
been crazy ; yet his own family thought him so and sent to arrest him 
as a madman, as above noticed. It is therefore self-evident, that the 
original Jesus "tradition," down as late as Papias and Irenseus, re- 
garded Jesus simply as a man, and as a very old man when he died a 
peaceful and natural death. But the zeal to combat and win the Pa- 
gans, when, after the failure with the Jews, the Gospel "turned to the 
Gentiles," and to exalt the man Jesus into a God, as was Perseus or 
Apollo, grew with the Fathers ; by the same token Jesus was now made 
to be the son of the Hebrew God Yahveh : we have heard the Fathers 
so argue. So later pious tampering grafted the "Virgin-birth" and 
"son of God" Pagan myths onto the simple original "traditions" of 
merely human origin as the "son of David," carelessly letting the 
primitively forged Davidic genealogies remain to contradict and re- 
fute them. These "interpolations" are self-apparent forgeries for 
Christ's sake, in two of the Gospels. 

But if Tertullian spoke truly (if the passage is genuine with him), 
the other Gospels have been yet further tampered with ; for Tertullian 
explicitly says: "Of the apostles, John and Matthew, and apostolic 
men, Luke and Mark, these all start with the same principles of the 
faith . . . how that He was born of the Virgin, and came to fulfill the 
law and the prophets." (Adv. Marcion, IV, ii; ANF. iii, 347.) As 
these Gospels now stand, Mark and John say not a word of the Virgin- 
birth, but throughout assume Jesus to have been of human birth, and 
only "son of God" in a popular religious sense ; for "son of God" 
was in current usage to mean any person near and dear to God. In- 
deed, the Greek text of the Gospels makes this plain, that no super- 
natural progeneration and actual God-sonship was intended. In most 
instances the Greek texts read simply "son of God huios Theou," 
not "the Son o hwotis": the definite article is a clerical falsifica- 


Of transcendent importance as the sole basis of the Church's most 
presumptuous False Pretense its Divine founding by Jesus Christ 
this Peter-Rock imposture, the most notorious, and in its evil conse- 
quences the most far-reaching and fatal of them all, will now be ex- 
posed to its deserved infamy and destruction. 

Upon a forged, and forced, Greek Pun put into the mouth of the 
Jewish Aramaic-speaking Jesus, speaking to Aramaic peasants, the 
Church of Christ is falsely founded. "The proof that Christ consti- 
tuted St. Peter the head of His Church is found in the two famous 
Petrine texts, Matt, xvi, 17-19, and John xxi, 15-19." (CE. xii, 261.) 
The text in John is that about "Feed my Lambs"; but this forgery is 
not of present interest. The more notorious "proof" is Matthew's 
forged punning passage: "Thou art Peter* and upon this rock I will 
build my church," etc. 

It may first be noticed, that "Matthew 5 * is the only one of the three 
"Synoptic" gospelers to record this "famous Petrine text." And he 
records this pun as made in Greek, by Jesus just before his cruci- 
fixion, under very exceptional circumstances, and upon the inspiration 
of a "special divine revelation" then and there first made by God to 
Peter, as below to be noted. But in this, "Matthew" is flatly contra- 
dicted by "John," who ascribes this as an Aramaic pun by Jesus in 
the very first remark that he made to Peter * upon his being introduced 
by his brother Andrew, on the self-same day of the baptism of Jesus ; 
when "Andrew first findeth his brother Simon . . . and brought him 
to Jesus"; whereupon, "when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art 
Simon son of Jona : thou shalt be caUed Cephas, which is by inter- 
pretation, A stone," (John i, 42.) Thus was Simon Barjona nick- 
named "Cephas Rock" by Jesus on the very first day of the public 
appearance and mission both of Jesus and of Peter, and not a year 
or more later, towards the close of the career of Jesus ! So the famous 
Petrine Pun, if ever made by Jesus as it was not was made in the 
Aramaic speech spoken by these Galilean peasants ; the Greek Father 
who forged the "Gospel according to John" had to attach the transla- 
tion into Greek of the Aramaic "Cephas," into "Petros, a stone," for 
the benefit of his Greek readers* 



After this first explosion of the famous Greek "Rock" pun on 
which the Church is founded, and as the matter is of highest conse- 
quence, let us expose the "Matthew" forgery of the whole "Petrine 
text" by arraying the three Synoptics in the "deadly parallel/* in 
the order of their composition and evolution from simple to complex 
fabrication : 

Mark (viii, 27-33). Luke (ix, 18-22). Matthew (xvi, 13-22). 

"And Jesus went 
out, and his disciples, 
into the towns of Cses- 
area Philippi: and by 
the way he asked his 
disciples, saying unto 
them, Whom do men 
say that I am? 

"And they an- 
swered, John the Bap- 
tist: but some say, 
Elias ; and others, One 
of the prophets. 

"And he saith unto 
them, But whom say ye 
that I am? And Peter 
answereth and saith 
unto him, Thou art the 

"And it came to 
pass, as he was alone 
praying, his disciples 
were with him; and he 
asked them, saying, 
Whom say the people 
that lam? 

"They answering 
said, John the Bap- 
tist; but some say, 
Elias; and others say, 
that one of the old 
prophets is risen again. 

"He said unto them, 
But whom say ye that 
I am ? Peter answering 
said, The Christ of 


"When Jesus came 
into the coasts of Caes- 
area Philippi, he 
asked his disciples, 
saying, Whom do men 
say that I the Son of 
man am? 

"And they said, 
Some say that thou art 
John the Baptist : 
some, Elias; and oth- 
ers, Jeremias, or one 
of the prophets. 

"He saith unto 
them, But whom say 
ye that I am? And Si- 
mon Peter answered 
and said, Thou are the 
Christ, the Son of the 
living God. 

"And Jesus an- 
swered and said unto 
him, Blessed art thou, 
Simon Barjona: for 
flesh and blood hath 
not revealed it unto 
thee, but my Father 
which is in heaven. 
"And I say unto 
thee, That thou art 
Peter, and upon this 
rock I will build my 
church; and the gates 

Mark. Luke. Matthew. 

of hell shall not pre- 
vail against it. [Here 
about the Keys, and 
"binding and loos- 

"Then charged he 
his disciples that they 
should tell no man that 
he was Jesus the 

"And he charged 
them that they should 
tell no man of him. 

"And he straitly 
charged them, and 
commanded them to 
tell no man that thing. 

"And he began to 
teach them, that the 
Son of man must suffer 
many things, and be 
rejected of the elders, 
and of the chief 
priests, and scribes, 
and be killed, and after 
three days rise again. 

"And he spake that 
saying openly. And 
Peter took him, and 
began to rebuke him. 

"But when he had 
turned about and 
looked on his disciples, 
he rebuked Peter, say- 
ing, Get thee behind 
me, Satan: for thou 
savourest not the 
things that be of God, 
but the things that be 
of men." 

"Saying, The Son 
of man must suffer 
many things, and be 
rejected of the elders 
and chief priests and 
scribes, and be slain, 
and be raised the third 

"From that time 
forth began Jesus to 
shew unto his disci- 
ples, how that he must 
go unto Jerusalem, and 
suffer many things of 
the elders and chief 
priests and scribes, 
and be killed, and be 
raised again the third 

"Then Peter took 
him, and began to re- 
buke him, saying, Be 
it far from thee, Lord: 
this shall not be unto 

"But he turned and 
said unto Peter, Get 
thee behind me. Satan: 
thou art an offence 
unto me: for thou sa- 
vourest not the things 
that be of God, but 
those that be of men." 

Let it be noted, in passing, that all three of the Synoptists ex- 
pressly aver in the above narration, as elsewhere in their texts, that 
Jesus positively declared and predicted, that he should be put to 
death, and after three days rise again: distinctly, his Resurrection 



from the dead. All three on this important point are liars, if John be 
believed; for after the crucifixion and burial of Jesus, and the dis- 
covery on the third day of his empty grave by the Magdalene, which 
she immediately reported to Peter and John, they ran doubting to 
the grave, looted in, and "saw, and believed 55 ; and John positively 
avers : "For as yet they "knew not the scripture, that he must rise agavn 
from the dead." (John xx, 9.) But this inspired assertion contains a 
grave anachronism: for "as yet" there was, of course, no "scripture" 
about the death and resurrection at all, nor for well over a century 
afterwards, as in this chapter is proven. 

Let us examine for a moment into the context of this "famous Pe- 
trine text" and into its antecedents, in order to get the "stage setting" 
of this dramatic climacteric Pun of such vast and serious consequences 
unto this day. 

The original simple narrative is told in the earlier writer, "Mark," 
and copied almost verbatim into "Luke." There Jesus is reported to 
have put a sort of conundrum to the Twelve, "saying unto them, Whom 
do men say that I am?" The answer showed a very superstitious belief 
in reincarnations or "second comings" of dead persons to earth ; for 
"they answered, John the Baptist : but some say, Elias ; and others, 
One of the prophets, or Jeremias," to fuse the somewhat disparate re- 
plies. Jesus himself shared this reincarnation superstition, for he had 
positively asserted that John the Baptist was Elijah redivmts: "This 
is Elias, which was for to come," (Matt, xi, 14 ; xvii, 1113) ; though 
John, being questioned about it, "Art thou Elias?" contradicted the 
Christ, "and he saith, I am not: 9 (John i, 20, 21.) 

After hearing the disciples report what others said about him, who 
he was, Jesus then "saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And 
Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ. And he 
charged them that they should tell no man of him" (ML viii, 27-30 ; 
Lk. ix, 18-22). There was certainly nothing novel or unexpected in 
this alleged reply of Peter ; it was exactly the proclaimed mission of 
Jesus as the "promised Messiah," as the precedent texts of "Mark" 
verify. On the day of his baptism by John, before all the people, "the 
heavens opened . . . And there came a voice from heaven, saying, 
Thou art my beloved Son" (i, 2) ; what the devils cried out in the 


synagogue, "I know thee who thou art, the Holy one of God 9 ' (i, 
just what all the devils unanimously proclaimed before the disciples 
and all hearers, "And unclean spirits, when they saw him, . * . cried, 
saying, Thou art the son of God" (iii, 2) ; just what the possessed man 
with the legion of devils cried out before all the disciples, "What have 
I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God" (v, 7) ; all 
as recorded by "Mark" prior to the above reply by Peter. So, nat- 
urally, Peter's "confession" caused no surprise; it was the expected 
thing: so Jesus made no remark on hearing it, except the peculiar 
injunction that "they should tell no man" what all men and devils 
already knew by much-repeated hearsay. So Jesus at once proceeded 
to speak of his coming persecution, death, and resurrection ; "And 
Peter took him, and began to rebuke him. But when he had turned 
about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee 
behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, 
but the things that be of men" (ML viii, 31-33). The identical story 
in its same simple form, minus the Satan colloquy, is told also in Luke 
(ix, 18-22). This is the round, unvarnished tale of the first Greek 
Father "gospel" writers, a century after the reputed conversation, 
and long before the "primacy of Peter" idea dawned as a "good thing" 
upon the Fathers of the Church. There is not a word about "church" 
in the passage, nor in the entire "gospel according to Mark," nor in 
Luke, nor in even the much later "John." 

The later Church Father who wrote up the original of the "gospel 
according to Matthew," copied Mark's story substantially verbatim, 
Mark's verses 27-33, being nearly word for word reproduced in Mat- 
thew's 13-16, 20-24 of chapter xvi; the only material verbal differ- 
ence being in Peter's answer, in verse 16, where Peter's words are ex- 
panded : "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God," obviously 
padded in by the "interpolator" of verses 17-19, which we now ex- 

As the years since "Mark" rolled by, the zeal of the Fathers to 
exalt Peter increased ; we have seen many admitted forgeries of docu- 
ments having that purpose in view. So it was, obviously, a new forg- 
ing Father who took a manuscript of "Matthew," and turning to the 
above verses copied from "Mark," added in, or made a new manu- 



script copy containing, the notable forgery of verses 1719. There, 
onto the commonplace and unnoticed reply of Peter, "Thou art the 
Christ," the pious interpolator tacked on : 

"the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, 
Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed 
it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, 
that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the 
gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the 
keys of the Kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth 
shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall 
be loosed in heaven." (Matt, xvi, 16b-19.) 

It is impossible that the original writer of "Matthew" should have 
written those remarkable and preposterous verses, in which Jesus is 
made to take Peter's commonplace announcement, "Thou art the 
Christ/ 5 as a "special revelation from heaven" to Peter and a great 
secret mystery here first "revealed" ; this matter of common notori- 
ety and even devil-gossip throughout Israel, as we have seen from 
"Mark's 5 ' numerous Christ-texts; the same is true in Luke. These 
avowals that Jesus was the Christ are even more numerous and ex- 
plicit in "Matthew" up to the interpolation. That Jesus was "Christ" 
is the identical disclosure and announcement, which had been declared 
by Gabriel to Mary ; by a dream to the suspicious Joseph ; by wicked 
Herod, who "demanded of them where Christ should be born" (ii, 4) ; 
by the voice from heaven proclaiming to the world, "This is- my beloved 
Son' 5 (iii, 17) ; that was declared by the Devil in the wilderness, "If 
thou be the Son of God" (iv, 6) ; that the Legion of Devils cried aloud, 
"What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou son of God" ( viii, 29) ; that 
Jesus himself avowed of himself time and again, "All things are de- 
livered unto me by my Father, Lord of heaven and earth" (xi, 25-27) ; 
that all the crew of Peter's fishing-boat acclaimed when they "wor- 
shipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God" (xiv, 33). 
Just two chapters earlier in Matthew, is the fable of Jesus and Peter 
"walking on the water," as "f oretold" by the Sibyls ; when Peter began 
to sink, he was rescued and dragged aboard the little fishing boat by 
Jesus ; "and they that were m the ship came and worshipped him, 
saying, Of a truth thou art the son of God." (Mt. xiv, 29-33.) So that 
Peter's wonderful information was no novelty and special divine rev- 


elation, to himself, but was the common credulity and gossip of the 
whole crew of fishermen, devils and Palestinian peasantry. And long 
before, on the very next day after his baptism by John, and before 
Peter was "called'* or even found, and when his brother Andrew went 
and found him to bring him to Jesus, Andrew declared to Peter: "We 
have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ"! 
(John i, 41.) And, on the next day Nathaniel said to Jesus: "Rabbi, 
thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel" ! (John i, 49.) 
Peter's wonderful "special revelation 9 * and confession thus lose all 
originality and are without merit of the great "reward" which CE. 
(xii, 261) says Jesus bestowed upon him for this pretended original 
and inspired discovery, as we shall in due order notice. 

That Jesus Christ never spoke the words of those forged verses, 
that they are a late Church forgery, is beyond any intelligent or hon- 
est denial. The first mention of them in "patristic literature," and that 
only a reference to the "keys," is this scant line of Father Tertullian, 
in a little tract called Scorpiace or "The Scorpion's Sting," written 
about 211 A. D., in which he says : "For though you think heaven is 
still shut, remember that the Lord left to Peter and through him to 
the Church, the keys of it." (Scorpiace, x ; ANF. iii, 643.) That Jesus 
did not use the words of those verses, interpolated into a paragraph of 
Matthew copied bodily and verbatim by the original "Matthew" 
writer from "Mark," and repeated in their original form by "Luke," is 
thus conclusive from "internal" evidences ; the later and embroidered 
form is a visible interpolation and forgery. That this is true, is dem- 
onstrated, moreover, by the inherent impossibility of the thing itself. 


First of all, in proof that Jesus Christ never made this Pun, did not 
establish any Christian Church nor even a Jewish reformed syna- 
gogue, are his own alleged positive statements to be quoted in refu- 
tation of the other forged "missionary** passage in Matthew: "Go ye 
into all the world, and teach all nations." The avowed mission of 
Jesus, as we have seen from his reputed words, was exclusively to his 
fellow Jews : "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of 
Israel" ; and he expressly commanded his disciples not to preach to the 



Gentiles, nor even to the near-Jewish Samaritans. He proclaimed the 
immediate end of the world, and his quick second coming to establish 
the exclusively Jewish Kingdom of Heaven, even before all the Jews 
of little Palestine could be warned of the event that "the Kingdom 
of Heaven is at hand." It is impossible, therefore, that Jesus could have 
so flagrantly contradicted the basic principles of his exclusive mission 
as the Jewish promised Messiah, and could have commanded the in- 
stitution of a permanent and perpetual religious organization, an 
"ecclesia" or "Church," to preach his exclusively Jewish Messianic 
doctrines to all nations of the earth, which was to perish within that 
generation. This is a conclusive proof of the later "interpolation" or 
forgery of this punning passage. 
On this point says EB. : 

"It would be a great mistake to suppose that Jesus himself founded a 
new religious community" (c. 3103). "A further consideration which tells 
against the genuineness of Mt. xvi, 18b, is the occurrence in it of the word 
ecclesia. It has been seen to be impossible to maintain that Jesus founded 
any distinct religious community. . . . 

"As for the word itself,, it occurs elsewhere in the Gospels only in Mt. 
xviii, 17- There, however, it denotes simply the Jewish local community to 
which every one belongs ; for what is said relates not to the future but to 
the present, in which a Christian ecclesia cannot, of course, be thought of/* 
(c. 3105) . . . "It is impossible to regard as historical the employment of 
the word ecclesia by Jesus as the designation of the Christian community." 
(EB. iii, 3103, 3105, 3117.) 

Indeed, as said by a contemporary wit, the truth is that "Jesus 
Christ did not found the Church he is its Foundling. His parent, 
the Jewish church, abandoned the child ; the Roman church took it in, 
adopted it, and gave his mother a certificate of good character." (The 
Truth Seeker, 10/23/26.) 

Jesus spoke Aramaic, a dialect of the ancient and "dead" Hebrew. 
The true name of the fisherman "Prince of the Apostles," just repu- 
diated by Jesus as "Satan," was SMmeon, or in its Greek form, Simon, 
who was later "surnamed Peter." He attained somehow the Aramaic 
nickname Kepha, or in its Greek form, Cephas, meaning a rock ; this 
evidently furnished to the Greek punster the cue for his play on words : 
"Thou brtPetros [Greek, petros, a rock; cf. Eng. petrify, petroleum, 


etc.], and upon this petros [rock] I will build my ecclesia [church]." 
Jesus could not have made this Greek play on words ; neither Peter 
nor any of the other "ignorant and unlearned" Jewish peasant dis- 
ciples could have understood it. Much less could Jesus have said, or the 
apostles have understood, this other Greek word "ecclesia," even had 
it been possible for Jesus, facing the immediate end of the world pro- 
claimed by himself to have dreamed of founding any permament re- 
ligious sect. There was nothing like ecclesia known to the Jews ; it was 
a technical Greek term designating the free political assemblies of the 
Greek republics. This is illustrated by one sentence from the Greek 
Father Origen, about 245 A. D., when the Church had taken over the 
Greek political term ecclesia to denote its own religious organization. 
Says Origen, using the word in both its old meaning and in its new 
Christian adaptation : "For the Church [ecclesia] of God, e. g. y which 
is at Athens; . . . Whereas the assembly [ecclesia] of the Athe- 
nians," etc. (Origen, Contra Celsum, iii, 20; ANF. iv, 476.) The 
Greek Fathers who, a century later, founded the Church among the 
Pagan Greek-speaking Gentiles, adopted the Greek word ecclesia for 
their organizations because the word was familiar for popular assem- 
blies, and because the translators of the Septuagint had used ecclesia 
as the nearest Greek term for the translation of the two Hebrew words 
qahal and edah used in the Old Testament for the "congregation" or 
"assembly" of all Israel at the tent of meeting. 

These Hebrew words (qahal, edah) had also a more general use, as 
signifying any sort of gathering or crowd, religious or secular. Thus 
"sinners shall not stand in the congregation [Heb. edah] of the right- 
eous" (Ps. i, 5) ; or of a mob of wicked ones : "I have hated the con- 
gregation [Heb. qahal'] of evil doers" (Ps. xxvi, 5) ; and even of the 
great assemblage of the dead: "The man that [etc.], shall remain 
in the congregation [Heb. qahal] of the dead" (Prov. xxi, 16) ; all 
these various senses being rendered "ecclesia" in the Greek Septuagint 

Thus no established and permanent organization of disciples of 
the Christ is implied by the term ecclesia, even if Jesus could have used 
the Aramaic equivalent of that Greek term ; at most it would have 
only meant the small group of Jews which might adopt the "Kingdom 
of Heaven" watchword and watchfully wait until the speedy end of the 


world and the expected quick consummation of the proclaimed King- 
dom, not yet come to be, these 2000 years. 

This only possible meaning is made indisputable by the one other 
instance of the use of the Greek word ecclesia attributed to Jesus, 
and that also by the myth-mongering "Matthew." Here Jesus is made 
to lay down some rules for settling the incessant discords among his 
peasant believers in the Kingdom: "Moreover, if thy brother shall 
trespass against thee . . . tell it to the church [ecclesia] but if he 
neglect to hear the ecclesia, let him be unto thee as an heathen man 
and a publican" (Matt, xviii, 15-17) ; that is, kick him like a dog 
out of your holy company and exclude him from share in the coming 
Kingdom. There was, of course, no organized Christian "Church" in 
the lifetime of Jesus ; he could only have meant (if he said it), that 
disputes were to be referred to the others of the little band of Kingdom- 
watchers, who should drop the "trespasser" out of their holy group 
if he proved recalcitrant and insisted upon the right of his opinion 
or action. But Jesus never said even this ; it is a forged later compan- 
ion-piece to the "Rock and Keys" forgery, as is proven fay the follow- 
ing verse 18 (a repetition of xvi, 19) regarding the "binding and 
loosing" powers given to itself by the later forging Church when it 
assumed this preposterous prerogative of domination. 

The "On this Rock" forgery of Matt, xvi, says Reinach, "is ob- 
viously an interpolation, made at a period when a church, separated 
from the synagogue, already existed. In the parallel passages in Mark 
(vii, 27, 32) and in Luke (ix, 18-22), there is not a word of the pri- 
macy of Peter, a detail which Mark, the disciple of Peter, could hardly 
have omitted if he had known of it. The interpolation is posterior to the 
compilation of Luke's gospel." (Orpheus, pp. 224-225.) 

As aptly said by Dr. McCabe ; "It [the word ecclesia] had no mean- 
ing whatever as a religious institution until decades after the death 
of Jesus Christ. In the year 30 A. D. no one on earth would have known 
what Jesus meant if he had said that he was going to *f ound' an ec- 
clesia or church, and that the powers of darkness would not prevail 
against it, and so on. It would sound like the talk of the Mad Hatter 
in Alice in Wonderland" (The Story of Religious Controversy, p. 
294.) Indeed, it may be remarked, it is the "powers of darkness" of 


mind which have so far prevailed to perpetuate this fraud ; the powers 
of the light of reason are hastening to its final overthrow. 


"Luke" was not present when this moumental pronouncement of 
the "Rock and Keys" was allegedly made ; Peter may have forgotten 
to tell him of it, or "Luke" may have forgotten that Peter told him. 
And Peter may have forgotten to tell of it and of his peerless "pri- 
macy" to his own "companion" and "interpreter" Mark, or Mark may 
have forgotten that Peter told him, and thus have failed to record 
so momentous an event. But John, the "Beloved Disciple" was right 
there, with Matthew, himself, one of the speakers and hearers in the 
historic colloquy, and John totally ignores it. The silence of all three 
discredits and repudiates it. Moreover, and most significantly, Peter 
himself, in his two alleged Epistles, has not a word of his tremendous 
dignity and importance conferred on him hy his Master ; never once 
does he describe himself in the pride of priestly humility, "Peter, Serv- 
ant of the servants of God," or "Prince of Apostles : or even "Bishop 
of the Church which sojourns at Rome," or any such to distinguish 
himself from the common herd of peasant apostles. Peter must have 
been very modest, even more so than his "Successors." 

Furthermore, the official "Acts of the Apostles" never once notes 
this divinely commissioned "primacy" of Peter ; and every other book 
of the New Testament utterly ignores it. Paul is said to have written 
a sententious "Epistle to the Romans," and to have written two or 
three Epistles from Rome, where Peter is supposed to have been, en- 
throned as divine Vicar of God and Head of the Church Universal ; 
and yet never a word of this tremendous fact ; Paul did not know it, or 
ignores it. The "Epistles of Paul," fourteen of them, and the "Acts," 
are replete with defiances of Paul to Peter, "I withstood him to his 
face" ; and in all the disputes between them, over matters of the faith 
and the fortunes of the new "Church," not a single one of the Apostles 
rises in his place and suggests that Peter is Prince and Primate, and 
that Peter's view of the matters was ex-cathedra the voice of God, and 
he, having spoken, the matter was settled. Paul, in all his Epistles, 



never gives a suspicion that he had ever heard, even from Peter, of the 
latter's superior authority. 

Thus the admitted principal, if not only "proof" which the Church 
urges for its Divine and "Petrine" foundation is found to be like 
every other Church muniment and credential, a clerical forgery, a 
priestly imposture. We shall glance at some other like examples of the 
Christian art of "Scripture" falsification. 


Applying Tertullian's test of authenticity, that contradictory 
passages betray a later "interpolation," the closing verses, 16-20, of 
the last chapter of Matthew as of Mark 9-20, are themselves late 
interpolations or forged passages. 

Matthew previously quotes Jesus as declaring : "I am not sent but 
unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (xv, 24 ; x, 6) ; and his com- 
mand to the Twelve : "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, . . . but 
go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (x, 5, 6). Also Mat- 
thew (as Mark) has reiterated the assurance of the immediacy of 
the end of the world and the "second coming" in glory : "Ye shall not 
have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of Man be come." (Mt. 
x, 23 ; cf. x, 7 ; xxvi, 28, 34, passim.) So that neither in reason nor in 
truthful statement could it be possible for Jesus to have met the 
Eleven a few days after his resurrection, in Galilee, and commanded 
them in this wonderful language : "Go ye therefore, and teach aU na- 
tions, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
of the Holy Ghost: . . . and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the 
end of the world" which he had just, and repeatedly, averred should 
happen in the life-time of his hearers and before they could preach 
even to the Jews of little Palestine. (Mt. xxviii, 18, 20; cf. Mk. xvi, 
15-16.) This "command" could only have been "interpolated" into 
the forged ending of Matthew and Mark long after the original form 
of the tradition of Jesus had been first written, and when the "second 
coming" in the "Kingdom of God" and the immediate "end of the 
world" had become impossible of further credit by lapse of long years 
of time and disappointed expectation. It could also only have been 
written after the gospel of the "Kingdom" for the Jews had failed, 


and the apostles had "turned to the Gentiles," which was not, even 
on the face of Scripture, until after the so-called "Council of Jerusa- 
lem/ 5 when the Jewish apostles, after bitter quarrel with the inter- 
loper Paul, had recognized Paul's pretended "revelation" of mission 
to the Gentiles and had parcelled out the propaganda work, Paul to 
the uncircumcised Gentiles, all the others, Peter included, to "the 
circumcision" only; though the entire story of the Council is itself a 
contradictory fabrication, as demonstrated by EB. (i, 916, et stq.) 


Culminating proof that Jesus Christ never uttered this command, to 
"Go, teach all nations," of Matthew and Mark, and that it is a forgery- 
long after interpolated into the original forged texts, is found in the 
positive "history" of the inspiredly forged Acts of the Apostles, in 
Holy Writ itself. If Jesus Christ, just arisen from the dead, had given 
that ringing and positive command to Peter and the Eleven, utterly 
impossible would it have been for the remarkable "history" recorded 
in Acts to have occurred. Acts, too, disproves the assertion of Mark 
that, straightway, after the command was given to the Eleven, "they 
went forth, and preached everywhere" (Mk. xvi, 20), that is, to all 
nations thereabouts, the Pagan Gentiles. A further contradiction may 
be noted: Matthew says that the command was given to the Eleven in 
Galilee, on "a mountain where Jesus had appointed them" (Mt, xxviii, 
1619), and some days after the resurrection; whereas Mark re- 
cords that the command was given to the Eleven "as they sat at meat," 
evidently in a house in Jerusalem, through the roof of which Jesus im- 
mediately afterwards ascended into heaven (Mk. xvi, 14-19) ; after 
which they immediately * Vent forth, and preached everywhere" (verse 
20). But they did not, as the silence of the other two Gospels, and the 
positive evidence of Acts and several of the Epistles, proves ; together 
with the promised disproof of the "Go, teach all nations" command, 
for preaching the Kingdom to the Gentile Pagans, now to be produced. 

Cornelius, the leader of the Italian Band at Caesarea, a Roman 
Gentile Pagan, had a "revelation" that he should go to Joppa to find 
Peter, evidently with a view to "conversion" and admission into the 
new all-Jewish sect. A companion vision in a trance was awarded to 



Peter, seemingly to prepare him for the novel notion of community 
with Gentiles ; though "Peter doubted in himself what this vision which 
he had seen should mean"; but at this juncture the messengers came 
from Cornelius, and related to Peter the vision of Cornelius, and his 
request that Peter come to see him. Evidently, Peter had never heard 
of the Master's command, alleged to have been given by Jesus to Peter 
himself, and the others : "Go, teach all nations" of the uncircumcised, 
for he said to the messengers : "Ye know how it is an unlawful thing for 
a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another na- 
tion"; but recalling the vision from which he had just awaked, he 
added : "but God hath shewed me" that it was permissible now to deal 
with "one of another nation/' So, Peter went along to Cornelius, and 
he asked "For what intent ye have sent for me?" Cornelius repeated 
the vision, and said, "Now we are all here present before God, to hear 
all things that are commanded thee by God." At this, Peter was evi- 
dently greatly surprised, and "opened his mouth, and replied ; Of a 
truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons : But that in every 
nation he that f eareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with 
him." Thus clearly Peter had never heard his Jesus command: "Go, 
teach all nations"; it required this new "revelation" some years 
later for him to tardily and finally "perceive" that God accepted 
even "one of another nation." Clearer yet is this, that up to this time, 
"salvation is of the Jews" only, by Peter's next words : "The word 
which God sent unto the children of Israel . . . which was published 
throughout Judaa [not to "all nations"], and began in Galilee, 
after the baptism which John preached [not baptism "in the name" 
of the Trinity]. . . . And he [Jesus] commanded us to preach unto 
all the people" of the children of Israel. And now for proof positive : 
Peter was now "showed" the new dispensation: a visitation of the 
Holy Ghost came upon the Pagans present, who thereupon all "spake 
with tongues," to the great amazement of Peter and his Jewish com- 
panions : "They of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as 
many as came with Peter 9 because that on the Gentiles was also poured 
out the gift of the Holy Ghost," which had been promised only to all 
believing Jews. Ignorant thus of the Christ's pre-ascension command 
to him and the Eleven, to teach all men, but now convinced that "one 
of another nation" was acceptable with God, and should be baptized, 


Peter yielded, and argued for his companions to consent: "Then an- 
swered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not le 
'baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he 
commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts x), 
not in the name of the Trinity, as Matthew alleges that Jesus himself 
had commanded Peter himself to do. So this bit of Scripture "history" 
is positive refutation of the "Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in 
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" for- 

And none of the others of the Twelve had ever heard the command. 
For immediately that they learned of this flagrant "heresy" of Peter, 
"that the Gentiles have also received the word of God," they were 
piously outraged and furious against Peter: "And when Peter had 
come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended 
with him, Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat 
with them." Peter put up a long argument in defense, urging the "rev- 
elation'* to Cornelius and his own trance vision, quoted the gospels of 
Matthew and John (not yet In existence 7), and wound up: "For- 
asmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, ... 
what am I, that I could withstand God?" This line of argument paci- 
fied the other apostles ; "When they heard these things, they held their 
peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles 
granted repentance unto life." (Acts xi.) Perfect proof is this, that 
the alleged "Go, teach all nations" command of the Christ to Peter 
and the other apostles, is a falsification, a late forgery into Matthew 
and Mark: for if Jesus had so commanded these same apostles, the 
special revelations would not have been necessary ; Peter's doubt and 
hesitation, and the row of the others with Peter for baptizing Cornelius 
and his Band could not have occurred, would have been impossible and 
absurd; as would have been the apostolic rows of the "Council of 
Jerusalem," recorded in Acts xv and belied by Paul in Galatians ii, as 
is made evident in EB. (i, 916.) 

This incontrovertible fact, that Jesus Christ never uttered that 
command, "Go, teach all nations," and that the texts so reciting are 
later forgeries to serve the Gentilic propaganda of the Faith after the 
Jews had rejected it, is confessed by CE. in these destructive words : 
"The Kingdom of God had special reference to Jewish beliefs. . . . 



A still further expansion resulted from the revelation directing St. 
Peter to admit to baptism Cornelius, a devout Gentile." (CE. iii, 747.) 
If Jesus Christ, preaching the exclusive Jewish Kingdom, had revised 
and reversed his God-ordained program, and had commanded "Go, 
teach all nations, baptizing them, 5 * the "expansion" would have re- 
sulted then and there from the command itself, not from the "rev- 
elation" and apostolic row some years later, which would have been 
unnecessary and supererogatory as it was unseemly. Thus another 
pious lie and forgery is exposed and confessed. 

Even more plain and comprehensive are the words of this same 
divine forged command of the Christ, as recorded by Mark: "Go ye 
into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. And he 
that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not 
shall be damned." (Mk. xvi, 15-16.) It should be a relief to many 
pious Hell-fearing Christians to know that their Christ did not utter 
these damning words, and that they may disbelieve with entire im- 
punity ; that they are priestly forgeries to frighten credulous persons 
into belief and submission to priestcraft. The proofs of this from the 
Bible itself we see confirmed by clerical admissions under compulsion 
from exposure of the fraud. 

Thus this whole section, says Reinach, is a "late addition" to Mark, 
"and is not found in the best manuscripts." (Orpheus, p. 221.) We 
have seen that CE. includes this section among those rejected as spu- 
rious up to the time that the Holy Ghost belatedly vouched for it at 
the Council of Trent in 1546, putting the seal of divine truth upon 
this lie. Both these parallel but exceedingly contradictory closing sec- 
tions of Matthew and Mark, are spurious additions- made after the 
"end of the world" and "second coming" predictions had notoriously 
failed, in order to give pretended divine sanction to the "turning to 
the Gentiles," after the Jews, to whom alone the Christ was sent and 
had expressly and repeatedly limited his mission, had rejected his 
claim to be Messiah. 

The Gentile Church of Christ has therefore no divine sanction; was 
never contemplated nor created by Jesus Christ. The Christian Church 
is thus founded on a forgery of pretended words of the pretended 
Christ. This proposition is of such immense significance and impor- 
tance, that I array here the admissions of the forgery, in addition to 


the demonstration of its falsity above given. The virtual admissions of 
CE. totally destroy the authenticity of the entire spurious section, 
Mark xvi, 9-20, together with the correlated passages of the equally 
spurious "Matthean addition," copied from Mark, with embellish- 
ments into Matthew. 


"The conclusion of Mark (xvi, 9-20) is admittedly not genuine. 
Still less can the shorter conclusion lay claim to genuineness. . . . 
Almost the entire section is a compilation, partly even from the fourth 
gospel and Acts." (EB. ii, 1880; 1767, n. 3; 1781, and n. 1, on "the 
evidence of its spuriousness.") "The longer form . . . has against it 
the testimony of the two oldest Uncial MSS. (Siniatic and Vatican) 
and one of the two earliest of the Syriac Versions (Siniatic Syriac), all 
of which close the chapter at verse 8. In addition to this, is the very sig- 
nificant silence of Patristic literature as to anything following verse 
8." (New Standard Bible Dictionary, p. 551.) The acute and careful 
critical reasonings and evidences upon which the foregoing conclusions 
are based, I have omitted from these extracts, to present them in full 
in the following ample review from CE., which, "reasoning in chains" 
fettered upon it by the Trentine Decree, yet fully establishes the im- 
peaching facts and substantially confesses the forgery into "Mark," 
while "saving its face" for the "inspiration" of the forgery by cler- 
ical assumption of "some other inspired pen" as the source of the text, 
which makes it "just as good" as any other, when invested with the 
sanctity of the sanction of the Council of Trent. Says CE. : 

"But the great textual problem of the Gospel (Mark) concerns the 
genuineness of the last twelve verses. Three conclusions of the Gospel are 
known : the long conclusion, as in our Bibles, containing verses 9-20, the 
short one ending with verse 8, and an intermediate form [described]. . . . 
Now this third form may be dismissed at once [as an admitted Bible 
forgery]. No scholar regards this intermediate conclusion as having any 
title to acceptance. 

"We may pass on, then, to consider how the case stands between the 
long conclusion and the short, t. e. between accepting xvi, 9-20, as a genuine 
portion of the original Gospel, or making the original end with xvi, 8. 
Eusebius . . . pointing out that the passage in Mark beginning with verse 



9 i not contained in all the MSS. of the Gospel. The historian then goes 
on himself to say that in nearly all the MSS. of Mark, at least in the ac- 
curate ones, the Gospel ends with xvi, 8. ... St. Jerome also says in one 
place that the passage was wanting in nearly all Greek MSS. ... As we 
know, he incorporated it in the Vulgate. ... If we add to this that the 
Gospel ends with xvi, 8, in the two oldest Greek MSS. [Siniatic and Vati- 
can] [also in the Siniatic Syriae, some Ethiopic, Armenian, and other 
MSS.] indicate doubt as to whether the true ending is at verse 8 or verse 
20. (p. 678.) . . . 

"Much has been made of the silence of some of the third and fourth 
century Fathers, their silence being interpreted to mean that they either 
did not know the passage or rejected it. Thus Tertullian, SS. Cyprian, 
Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Cyril of Alex- 

"When we turn to the internal evidence, the number, and still more the 
character, of the peculiarities is certainly striking [citing many instances 
from the Greek text]. . . But, even when this is said, the cumulative 
force of the evidence against the Marcan origin of the passage is consider- 
able, (p. 678.) . . . The combination of so many peculiar features, not 
only of vocabulary, but of matter and construction, leaves room for doubt 
as to the Marcan authorship of the verses, (p. 679.) . . 

"Whatever the fact be, it is not at all certain that Mark did not write 
the disputed verses. It may be that he did not; that they are from the pen 
of some other inspired writer [ ! ], and were appended to the Gospel in the 
the first century or the beginning of the second. . . . Catholics are not 
bound to hold that the verses were written by St. Mark. But they are 
canonical Scripture, for the Council of Trent (Sess. IV), in defining that 
all parts of the Sacred Books are to be received as sacred and canonical, 
had especially in view the disputed parts of the Gospels, of which this 
conclusion of Mark is one. Hence, whoever wrote the verses, they are in- 
spired, and must be received as such by every Catholic." (CE. ix, 677, 678, 

The New Commentary on the Holy Scripture has a special section 
entitled "The Ending of St. Mark's Gospel," in which it reviews the 
evidences in much the same manner as CE., with additional new and 
able criticism ; it thus concludes, not being fettered by the dogmatic 
decision of the Council of Trent, which CE. so clerically yields to in 
the letter but evades in the spirit : 

"It is practically certain that neither Matthew nor Luke found it in 
their copies of Mark [from which they copied in making up the gospels 
under those names: see pp. 33, 45], . . . The Last Twelve Verses are con- 


structed as an independent summary with total neglect of the contents of 
xvi, 18. . . . It is as certain as anything can be in the domain of criticism 
that the Longer Ending did not come from the pen of the evangelist Mark. 
. . . We conclude that it & certain that the Longer Ending is no part of the 
Gospel." (New Commentary,?*. Ill, pp. 122, 123.) 

More shaming proofs and confessions of forgery of pretended words 
of the Christ there could not be, than of this falsified command to 
preach a forged Gospel to the credulous dupes of Paganism. Gentile 
Christianity collapses upon its forged foundations. 


The contradictory baptismal formulas, 5 * the simple "in the name 
of the Lord'* of Peter in Acts, and*the elaborated forgery of Matthew, 
"in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost/ 5 
are sufficiently branded with falsity in the preceding paragraphs, and 
may be dismissed without further notice. This "Trinitarian Formula" 
is most palpably a late forgery, never uttered by Jesus Christ ; for the 
Holy "Trinity" was not itself officially invented until the Council of 
Constantinople, in 381 A. B. Admittedly, "of all revealed truths this 
is the most impenetrable to reason"; it is therefore called a "mystery.** 
(CE. xv, 52.) Of this Baptism-formula of Matthew, the ex-priest 
scholar, McCabe, says : "It was fraudulently added to the gospel when 
the priesthood was created." (LBB. 1121, p. 4.) Bishop Gore's Eng- 
lish Divines thus cautiously confess the fraud: "Matthew's witness to 
the teaching of the risen Lord in these verses is widely rejected on two 
grounds. . . . The witness of Acts makes it almost certain that bap- 
tism at first was into the name of Jesus Christ, and not formally into 
the name of the Blessed Trinity. ... It is quite likely that Matthew 
here expresses our Lord's teaching in language which the Lord Him- 
self did not actually use." (New Comm., Pt. Ill, p. 204; cf. EB. i, 
474.) Another blasting priestly fraud of "Scripture" forgery is thus 
exposed and confessed! 


After the foregoing colossal forgeries within the originally forged 
Gospels of Jesus Christ, there yet remain many other viciously dis- 
honest falsifications of text. A little trinity of them only will be noted. 




The CE. has admitted that the so-called pericope adulteros was re- 
garded as spurious until the Council of Trent, in 1546, declared it 
divine truth ; but Reinach says : "The episode of Jesus and the woman 
taken in adultery, which was inserted in John's gospel in the fourth 
century, was originally in the [apocryphal] 'Gospel according to 
the Hebrews. 5 " (Orpheus, p. 235.) 


The entire chapter xxi of John is likewise a surcharge of forgery in 
that gospel ; it may be disposed of with this terse comment of EB. : "As 
xx, 30-31 constitutes a formal and solemn conclusion, xxi is beyond 
question a later appendix. We may go on to add that it does not come 
from the same author with the rest of the book." (EB. ii, 2543.) 


As may be seen by mere comparison, the "Doxology" at the end of 
the Lord's Prayer in Matthew (vi, 13) : 'Tor thine is the kingdom, 
and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen, 5 ' is an interpolation into 
the original text, and is omitted as spurious by the Revised Version ; it 
is not in the Catholic "True" Version. But, it may be remarked, the 
whole of the so-called Lord's Prayer is not the Lord's at all ; it is a 
late patch-work of pieces out of the Old Testament, as readily shown 
by the marginal cross-references, just as we have seen that the 
"Apostles Creed" was said to have been patched up by inspired lines 
from each apostle. The Sermon on the Mount, in which its most used 
form is found, is a concatenation of supposed logia or "sayings" of 
Jesus, drawn out through three chapters of "Matthew" ; it was deliv- 
ered before "the multitudes'* which surrounded the Master and his 
disciples, and in the middle of the fictitious discourse. This is not true, 
according to "Luke," who makes it out a private talk in reply to a 
question by one of the Twelve : "And it came to pass, 'that, as (Jesus) 
was praying in a certain place, when he ceased one of his disciples said 
to him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples. And 
he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father," etc. (Luke xi, 1- 


2.) Indeed, the entire "Lord's Prayer" in Matthew, copied from Luke 
and expanded with considerable new material, is as to such new matter 
a forgery, confesses CE.: "Thus it is that the shorter form of the 
Lord's Prayer in Luke, xi, 2-4, is in almost all Greek manuscripts 
lengthened out in accordance with Matthew, vi 9 9-13. Most errors of 
this kind proceed," etc. (CE. iv, 498.) I shall quote now the whole of 
CE.'s paragraph, admitting this and other "deliberate corruptions" of 
the New Testament texts, with clerical apologetic reasons therefor : 

"(b) Errors Wholly or Partly Intentional. Deliberate corruption of 
the Sacred Text has always been rather rare, Marcion's case being excep- 
tional. Hort (Introduction (1896), p. 282) is of the opinion that 'even 
among the unquestionably spurious readings of the New Testament there 
are no signs of deliberate falsification of the text for dogmatic purposes/ 
Nevertheless it is true that the scribe often selects from various readings 
that which favours either his own individual opinion or the doctrine that 
is just then more generally accepted. It also happens that, in perfectly 
good faith, he changes passages which seem to him corrupt because he fails 
to understand them, that he adds a word which he deems necessary for the 
elucidation of the meaning, that he substitutes a more correct grammatical 
expression, and that he harmonises parallel passages. Thus it is that the 
shorter form of the Lord's Prayer in Luke, xi, 2-4, is in almost all Greek 
manuscripts lengthened out in accordance with Matthew, vi, 9-13. Most 
errors of this kind proceed from inserting in the text marginal notes which, 
in the copy to be transcribed, were but variants, explanations, parallel pas- 
sages, simple remarks, or perhaps the conjectures of some studious reader. 
All readers have observed the predilection of copyists for the most verbose 
texts and their tendency to complete citations that are too brief; hence it 
is that an interpolation stands a far better chance of being perpetuated 
than an omission." (CE. iv, 4*98.) 

Thus, as to the c *Lord*s Prayer" in Matthew, its Variants* 5 from 
Luke are confessed forgeries ; every circumstance of the two origins is 
in contradiction. Like the whole "Sermon on the Mount," the Prayer 
is a composite of ancient sayings of the Scripture strung together to 
form it, as the marginal cross-references show throughout. 

At this point I may call attention to a notable instance in Act* 
of a fraudulent perversion of text ; Paul's use of the pretended inscrip- 



tion on the statue on Mars* Hill, "To the Unknown God," on which is 
based his famous harangue to the Athenians : "Whom therefore ye 
ignorantlj worship, him declare I unto you." This omits the truth, 
for the whole inscription would have been fatal to his cause. The ac- 
tual words of the inscription, together with some uncomplimentary 
comment on "Paul's" manipulation of the truth, are presented by the 
famous Catholic "Humanist" Erasmus. First he states the chronic 
clerical propensity to warp even Scripture to their deceptive schemes : 
"In general it is the public charter of all divines, to mould and bend 
the sacred oracles till they comply with their own fancy, spreading 
them (as Heaven by its Creator) like a curtain, closing together, or 
drawing them back as they please." Then he discloses the dishonest 
dodge of the great Apostle of Persecution : "Indeed, St. Paul minces 
and mangles some citations which he makes use of, and seems to wrest 
them to a different sense from that for which they were first intended, 
as is confessed by the great linguist St. Jerome. Thus when that apos- 
tle saw at Athens the inscription of an altar, he draws from it an argu- 
ment for the proof of the Christian religion ; but leaving out a great 
part of the sentence, which perhaps if fully recited might have prej- 
udiced his cause, he mentions only the last two words, viz., 'To the 
Unknown God'; and this, too, not without alteration, for the whole 
inscription runs thus : <TO THE GODS OF ASIA, EUROPE, AND 
mus, The Praise of Folly, p. 292.) That the original Greek text of 
Acts used the plural "gods" is shown by the marginal note to Acts 
xvii, 23, in the King James Version. From this dreary exposure of 
"Gospel 35 forgeries we pass to the forged "Epistles of the Apostles." 


There are 21 so-called Epistles or Letters found in the New Testa- 
ment under the names of five different "apostles" of Jesus Christ. 
Making a significant reservation which seems to question the plenary 
inspiration of the Council of Trent, "There are," says CE. 9 "thirteen 
Epistles of St. Paul, and perhaps fourteen, if, with the Council of 
Trent, we consider him the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews." ( CE. 
xiv, 530.) If Paul, the "apostle of the Gentiles," didn't write the Let- 


ter to the Hebrews, some Church Father must have forged it in his 
name. This was admitted by the early Fathers : "Tertullian ascribed 
it to Barnabas, and Origen confessed that the author was not known." 
(Reinach, Orpheus, p. 235 ; CE. xiv, 525 ; New Comm. Pt. Ill, p. 596.) 
"The Epistle to the Hebrews,' 5 says EB., "had already been excluded 
from the group [of then supposed Pauline Epistles] by Carlstadt 
(1520) , and among those who followed him in this were Luther, Calvin, 
Grotius, etc." (EB. iii, 3605.) So CE.'s cautious clerical reservation 
is justified, and the forgery of Hebrews in the name of Paul may be 
taken as established, the inspired Council of Trent to the contrary 

But the entire "Pauline group" is in the same forged class with 
Hebrews, says EB. after exhaustive consideration of the proofs, in- 
ternal and external : 

"With respect to the canonical Pauline Epistles, . , . there are 
none of them by Paul; neither fourteen, nor thirteen, nor nine or eight, 
nor yet even the four so long 'universally' regarded as unassailable. 
They are all, without distinction, pseudographia [false-writings, for- 
geries] ; [it adds, with a typical clerical striving after saving some- 
thing from the wreckage] this, of course, not implying the least de- 
preciation of their contents. . . . The group . . . bears obvious 
marks of a certain unity of having originated in one circle, at one 
time, in one environment ; but not of unity of authorship" (EB. iii, 
3625, 3626.) They are thus all uninspired anonymous church forgeries 
for Christ's sweet sake ! 

Besides the so-called Pauline Epistles, another group, i. e. those at- 
tributed to Peter, John, Jude and James, is known as "Catholic Epis- 
tles," so called because addressed to the Church at large ; "not one of 
them is authentic. 5 ' (Reinach, Orpheus, p. 239; cf. EB., under the 
various titles.) A third small group, Titus and 2 Timothy, are called 
"Pastoral Epistles" because they are addressed to pastors of churches. 
These, with Acts and the Book of Revelation, complete the tale of the 
Old-Christian Literature finally approved, in 1546, by the Council of 
Trent as divinely inspired, along with the inspired nonsense of Tobias, 
Judith, Bel and the Dragon, and like late Hebrew pious forgeries. 
With respect to the Apocalypse Revelation, attributed to the Apostle 
John, this has long been held to be impossible ; nor is Revelation by the 



same writer as the Fourth Gospel falsely attributed to John, as we 
have seen. The results of ancient patristic denials and of modern criti- 
cal scholarship are thus summed up: "John , . . is not the author of 
the Fourth Gospel ; so, in like manner, in the Apocalypse we may have 
here and there a passage that may be traced to him, but the book as a 
whole is not from his pen. Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse all come 
from the same school" (EB. i, 199.) "The author of Revelation calls 
himself John the Apostle. As he was not John the Apostle, who died 
perhaps in Palestine about 66, he was a forger." (Orpheus p. 240.) 
The same can. truly be said as to all the others. 

It is impossible here to review the criticism of the twenty-three 
booklets individually. The comment of EB. on the Epistle to the 
Philippians,' as not written by Paul, is fairly applicable to them all : 
"What finally puts an end to all doubt is the presence of unmistakable 
traces of the conditions of a later period. . . . More particularly, 
everything that points to a considerably advanced stage in the develop- 
ment of doctrine." (EB. iii, 3709.) This principle of criticism will be 
admitted by anyone; we have read it from CE. as "universally ad- 
mitted," to wit : "A fundamental one is that a literary work always 
betrays the imprint of the age and environment in which it was pro- 
duced." (CE. iv, 492.) Paul and Peter are reputed to have died to- 
gether in Rome under Nero, in 64 (67) A. D. We have shown the im- 
possibility of the existence of "New Testament" writings, and of a 
"church" during the first several generations which daily expected the 
end of the world and the sudden second coming of the Christ to set up 
the supernatural Kingdom of God, among, of, and for Jews only. More 
especially impossible is it, that a Catholic or "universal" Church 
among the far-scattered cities and nations of the Gentiles should have 
existed even in embryo within the scant, say 35 years between the re- 
puted death of Jesus about 30 A. D. and the deaths of Paul and Peter 
in 64 (67) A. D. Most impossible would it have been for such Gentile 
Church then to have had the intricate hierarchical organization of 
Bishops, presbyters, deacons, priests, and "damnable heresies," por- 
trayed as actually existing and in active function, by these apocry- 
phal Epistles. They are self-evidently the product of an elaborately 
organized church, just as they are more elaborately laid out and 
their several jurisdictions and functions defined in the admittedly 


forged Apostolic Constitutions and Canons, forged in the names of 
the apostles in the following centuries. Nothing from ancient times 
can be or is more positively proven false and forged than every book 
and text of the New Testament, attributed to apostles. Who can now 
deny this? 


Owing to the peculiar importance attributed to them by the 
Church, as among the most unquestionable of its "proofs" of 
authentic divine foundation and sanction, the so-called Epistles I 
and II of Peter call for a few words of special refutation. These two 
Peter books were, in truth, questioned and denied from the early days. 
Bishop Eusebius, the first Church Historian, (HE. Ill, iii, 25), says 
of II Peter that it was "controverted and not admitted into the 
canon" ; and, says EB.> "The tardy recognition of II Peter in the 
early church supports the judgment of the critical school as to its 
unapostolic origin." (EB. iii, 3684.) 

The critical considerations which lead to the rejection of both 
Epistles as "not Petrine" and "not of the apostolic age," may be very 
briefly summarized: That I Peter is addressed to the "sojourners of 
the Dispersion" in Asia Minor, which was Paul's reserved territory. 
"There is no trace of the questions mooted in the apostolic age. . . . 
The historical conditions and circumstances implied in the Epistle 
indicate, moreover, a time far beyond the probable duration of Peter's 
life. . . . The history of the spread of Christianity imperatively de- 
mands for I Peter a later date than 64 A. D.," the alleged date of 
Peter's death. The second Epistle, II Peter, is vaguely addressed to 
Christians in general (i, 1), yet in iii, 1, the writer inconsistently as- 
sumes that the Pirst Epistle was addressed to the same readers ; and 
he tells them (i, 6 and iii, 15) that they had already received instruc- 
tions from him (ostensibly Peter), and also letters from Paul. "The 
relation of II Peter to I Peter renders a common authorship extremely 
doubtful. The name and title of the author are different. . . * The 
style of the two epistles is different. ... It is late and unapostolic." 
(EB. Peter, Epistles of, iii, 3678-3685; cf. New Comm. PL HI, pp. 
639, 653, 654.) "The genuineness of I Peter cannot be maintained. 



Most probably it was not written before 112 A. D." (EB. 2940.) "The 
two letters of Peter are Graeco-Egyptian forgeries." (Reinach, Or- 
pheus, p. 240.) The Church pretense that I Peter was written at Rome 
("Babylon") will be judged in its more appropriate place. In the 
early list of supposedly apostolic Books drawn up by Tertullian as 
accepted and read in the several Churches, while he "cites the Book 
of Enoch as inspired, . . . also recognizes IV Esdras, and the Sibyl, 
... he does not know James and II Peter. ... He attributes He- 
brews to St. Barnabas." (CE. xiv, 525.) Bishop Dionysius complains 
that his own writings "had been falsified by the apostles of the devil ; 
no wonder, he adds, Hhat the Scriptures were falsified by such per- 
sons.' " (CE. v, 10.) The 'Teter" Books are other instances. 


In the King James or "Authorized? Version we read : "Great is the 
mystery of Godliness : God was manifest in the flesh," etc. (1 Tim. iii, 
16.) In the "Revised Version" this "God manifest" forged interpola- 
tion is shamed out of the text, which there honestly reads : "He who 
was manifested in the flesh," etc. Thus the great "mystery of godli- 
ness," premised in the text, is no longer a mystery ; and the fraudu- 
lent insertion into the text by some over-zealous Christian forger, 
seeking to bolster up an "apostolic" pedigree for the later "tradition" 
of the divinity of the Christ, is confessed. This pious "interpolation" 
was probably made at the time and by the same holy hands which 
forged the "Virgin-birth" interpolations into "Matthew" 1 and "Luke." 
This passage is but one of a whole series of "Spurious Passages in the 
New Testament," catalogued by Taylor, in the appendix to his 
Diegesis, (p. 421). This pious fraud was first detected and exposed 
by Sir Isaac Newton. 


Bishop Clement of Alexandria, writing around 200 A. D., thus 
quotes a comparatively trivial and inocuous passage from the forged 
First Epistle of St. John (v, 7), which, through fraudulent tamper- 
ing later became one of the "chief stones of the corner" of the Holy 
Church that the Fathers built : "John says : Tor there are three that 


bear witness, the spirit, and the water, and the blood : and these three 
are one. 5 " (Clem. Alex., Fragment from Cassiodorws, ch. iii ; ANF. iii, 
576.) This is self-evidently the original text of this now famous, or 
infamous, passage. Turning now to the Word of God as found in the 
"Authorized" Protestant and in the Chaloner-Douay Version of the 
Catholic Vulgate, we read with wonder: 

"7. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, 
and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 

"8. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the 
water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. 1 * (I John, v, 7, 8.) 

Let us now turn to the same text, or what is left of it, in the Revised 
Version. Here we read, with more wonder (if we do not know the story 
of pious fraud behind it), what seems to be a garbled text: 

"8. For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and 
the blood : and the three agree in one." 

Erasmus first detected the fraud and omitted the forged verse in 
his edition of the Greek Testament in 1516. (New Comm. Pt. Ill, p. 
718-19.) This verse 7, bluntly speaking, is a forgery: "It had been 
wilfully and wickedly interpolated, to sustain the Trinitarian doc- 
trine ; it has been entirely omitted by the Revisers of the New Testa- 
ment. 5 * (Roberts, Companion to the Revised Version^ p. 72.) "This 
memorable text," says Gibbon, "is condemned by the silence of the 
Fathers, ancient versions, and authentic manuscripts, of all the manu- 
scripts now extant, above four score in number, some of which are 
more than 1200 years old." (Ch. xxvii, p. 598.) Speaking of this and 
another, Reinach says : "One of these forgeries (I John v, 7) was sub- 
jected to interpolation of a later date. ... If these two verses were 
authentic, they would be an affirmation of the doctrine of the Trinity, 
at a time when the gospels, and Acts and St. Paul ignore it. It was 
first pointed out in 1516 that these verses were an interpolation, for 
they do not appear in the best manuscripts down to the fifteenth cen- 
tury. The Roman Church refused to bow to the evidence* . . The 
Congregation of the Index, on January 13, 1897, with the approbation 
of Leo XIII, forbade any question of the authenticity of the text re- 



lating to the *Three Heavenly Witnesses.' It showed in this instance 
a wilful ignorance to which St. Gregory's rebuke is specially appli- 
cable: 'God does not need our lies. 5 " (Orpheus, p. 239.) But His 
Church does ; for without them it would not be ; and without the forged 
"Three Heavenly Witnesses," and the forged "Baptism Formula" 
of Matthew (xxviii, 19), there would be not a word in the entire 
New Testament hinting the existence of the Three-in-One God of 
Christianity. The Holy Trinity is an unholy Forgery ! 

Lest it be thought by some pious but uninformed persons that the 
foregoing imputation may be either false or malicious, we shall let 
CE. make the confession of shame, with the usual clerical evasions to 
"save the face 3 ' of Holy Church confronted with this proven forgery 
and fraud. From a lengthy and detailed review, under separate head- 
ings, of all the ancient MSS., Greek, Syriac, Ethiopic, Armenian, Old 
Latin, and of the Fathers, the following is condensed, but in the exact 
words of the text : 

"The famous passage of the Three Witnesses [quoting I John, v, 7]. 
Throughout the past three hundred years, effort has been made to expunge 
from our Clementine Vulgate edition of the canonical Scriptures the words 
that are bracketed. Let us examine the facts of the case. [ Here follows the 
thorough review of the MSS, closed in each instance by such words as: 
"The disputed part is found in none' 1 ; "no trace" ; "no knowledge until the 
twelfth century," etc. etc.] The silence of the great and voluminous St. 
Augustine, [etc.] are admitted facts that militate against the canonicity of 
the Three Witnesses. St. Jerome does not seem to know the text, [Je- 
rome made the Vulgate Official Version] . 

"Trent's is the first certain oecumenical decree, whereby the Church 
established the Canon of Scripture. We cannot say that the Decree of Trent 
necessarily included the Three Witnesses" [for reasons elaborately 
stated, and upon two conditions discussed, saying] : "Neither condition has 
yet been verified with certainty ; quite the contrary, textual criticism seems 
to indicate that the Comma Johanninum was not at all times and every- 
where wont to be read in the Catholic Church, and it is not contained in 
the Old Latin Vulgate. However, the Catholic theologian must take into 
account more than textual criticism" ! (CE. viii, 436.) 

A confessed forgery of Holy Writ consciously kept in the "canoni- 
cal" text as a fraudulent voucher for a false Trinity such is "The 
Three Heavenly Witnesses" to the shame and ignominy of the Holy 


Church of Christ, which "has never deceived any one," and which "has 
never made an error, and never shall err to all eternity** ! This is not 
an error, however; it is but one more deliberate clerical "lie to the 
glory of God." 




"Nevertheless, the forging of papal letters was even more frequent in 
the Middle Ages than in the early Church." (CE. ix, 203.) 

LYINGI/T POUNDED ON forgery upon forgery, as has been made 
manifest by manifold admissions and proofs, the Church of 
Christ perpetuated itself and consolidated its vast usurped 
powers, and amassed amazing wealth, by a series of further and more 
secular forgeries and frauds unprecedented in human history 
faintly approximated only by its initial forgeries of the fundamental 
gospels and epistles of the "New Testament of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ," and of the countless other forged religious documents 
which we have so far reviewed. These first relate to the infance of the 
Church constitute its false certificates of Heavenly birth and of 
Divine civil status. They are, as it were, the livery of heaven with which 
Holy Church clothed its moral nakedness until it attained maturer 
strength and became adept to commit the most stupendous forgeries 
for its own self-aggrandizement and for the completer domination 
of mind and soul of its ignorant and superstitious subjects. 

The record which we shall now expose is the most sordid in human 
annals, of frauds and forgeries perpetrated for the base purposes 
of greed for worldly riches and power, and designed so to paralyze 
and stultify the minds and reason of men that they should suffer them- 
selves to be exploited without caring or daring to question or com- 
plain, and be helpless to resist the crimes committed against them. 
Into this chapter we shall compress in as summary manner as possible 
the revolting record of Christian fraud by means of forged title deeds 
to vast territories, forged documents of ecclesiastical power spiritual 
and temporal, forged and false Saints, Martyrs, Miracles and Relics 

surpassing the power of imagination or accomplishment by any 
other than a divinely inspired Church which "has never deceived any- 
one," and which "never has erred" in its profound, cynical knowledge 
and exploitation of the degraded depths of ignorance and supersti- 
tion to which it had sunk its victims, and of their mental and moral 
incapacity to detect the holy frauds worked upon them. This was the 
glorious Age of Faith the Dark Ages of human benightedness and 
priestly thralldomi when Holy Church was the Divinely-illumined and 
unique Teacher of Christendom, and when the Christian world was too 
ignorant to be unbelieving or heretic, for "unbelief is no sin that 
ignorance was ever capable of being guilty of." 

In those "Dark Ages, as the period of Catholic ascendency is justly 
called" (Lecky, History of European Morals, ii, 14), "men were 
credulous and ignorant," says Buckle; "they therefore produced a 
religion which required great belief and little knowledge." Again he 
says : "The only remedy for superstition is knowledge. . . . Nothing 
else can wipe out that plague-spot of the human mind." It was, indeed, 
agrees CE. (from 4*32 to 1461) "an age of terrible corruption and 
social decadence" (xiv, 318) ; and of its mental state it says: "To 
such an extent had certain imaginary concepts become the common 
property of the people, that they repeated themselves as auto-sug- 
gestions and dreams." (CE. ix, 130.) But exactjy this period the 
"Dark Ages of Catholic ascendency," with centuries before and 
since, was the heyday of Holy Faith and Holy Church : it may well be 
wondered who was responsible for such conditions, when only Holy 
Church existed, in plentitude of power, the inspired Teacher of Chris- 
tendom? During all these centuries, "the overwhelming importance 
attached to theology diverted to it all those intellects which in another 
condition of society would have been employed in the investigations of 
science." (Lecky, History of Rationalism in Europe, i, 275 ; cf . Bacon, 
Novum Organum, I, 89.) What else could be expected, was possible, 
when "a boundless intolerance of all divergencies of opinion was united 
with an equally boundless toleration of all falsehood and deliberate 
fraud that could favor received opinions?" (Lecky, History of Euro- 
pean Morals, ii, 15.) Indeed, "few people realize the degree in which 
these superstitions were encouraged by the Church which claims in- 
fallibility." (Lecky, Hist. Rationalism, i, 79, n.) It is confessed: 


"The Church is tolerant of * pious belief a 9 which have helped to fur- 
ther Christianity"! (CE. xiv, 341.) 


For more than a thousand years, until their fraud was exposed by 
modern historical criticism, these voluminous and most commodious 
forgeries formed the groundwork and foundation of some of the most 
extravagant pretensions of the Church and its most potent instru- 
ment of establishment and dominion of its monarchical government 
The Apostolic Constitutions, which we have admitted for naivete of 
invention with respect to the Apostolic Prince Peter and Simon 
Magus in their magic contests in Rome, is in fact "a fourth-century 
pseudo-Apostolic collection. ... It purports to be the work of the 
Apostles, whose instructions, whether given by them individually or 
as a body, are supposed to be gathered and handed down by the pre- 
tended compiler, [Pope] St. Clement of Rome, the authority of whose 
name gave fictitious weight to more than one such piece of early 
Christian literature. . . . The Apostolic Constitutions were held 
generally in high esteem and served as the basis for much ecclesiastical 
legislation. ... As late as 1563 . . . despite the glaring archaisms 
and incongruities of the collection it was contended that it was the 
genuine work of the Apostles . . . could yet pretend, m an uncritical 
age, to Apostolic origin." (CE. i, 636.) 

The Constitutions, pretending to be written by the apostles, laid 
down in minute detail all the intricacies of organization of several 
centuries later; there being elaborate chapters "concerning bishops," 
presbyters, deacons, all kinds of clergy, liturgies, and Church pro- 
ceedings and services, undreamed of by "apostles," or in the "apos- 
tolic age." The prescriptions regarding the selection of bishops are 
quite democratic, and vastly different from present papal practices ; 
the Churches, too, are distinctly episcopal and independent. The 
nature of these provisions, as well as the grossly false and fraudulent 
character of the whole, a vast arsenal of papal aggression, may be 
seen by the following passage in the apostolic first person: "Where- 
fore we, the twelve apostles of the Lord, who are now together, give 
you in charge those divine constitutions concerning every ecclesiasti- 


cal form, there being present with us Paul, the chosen vessel, our fel- 
low apostle, and James the bishop, and the rest of the presbyters, and 
the seven deacons. In the first place, therefore, I Peter say> that a 
bishop to be ordained is to be, as we have already, all of us, appointed, 
. . . chosen by the whole people, who, when he is named and approved, 
let the people assemble, with the presbyters and bishops that are 
present, on the Lord's day, and let them give their consent. . . . And 
if they give their consent," etc. (Apost. Const. VIII, 2, iv; ANF. vii, 


Prom the same pious forging hand, says CE. (i, 637), comes the 
related Apostolic Canons (composed about 400), "a collection of 
ancient ecclesiastical decrees concerning the government and discipline 
of the Church; , . . in a word, they are a handy summary of the statu- 
tory legislation of the primitive Church. . . . They claim to be the 
very legislation of the Apostles themselves, at least as promulgated 
by their great disciple Clement. Nevertheless, their claim to genuine 
Apostolic origin is quite false and untenable. . . . The text passed 
into Pseudo-Isidore, and eventually Gratian included (about 1140) 
some excerpts of these canons in his 'Decretum,* whereby a universal 
recognition and use were gamed for them in the law schools. At a much 
earlier date, Justinian (in his sixth Novel) had recognized them as the 
work of the Apostles, and confirmed them as eccclesiastical law." (CE. 
iii, 279, 280.) Here the pious priests of God palmed off these self- 
serving forgeries on the great but superstitious Emperor and fraudu- 
lently secured their enactment into imperial law. In the same article 
is a description of "a larger number of forged documents appearing 
about the middle of the ninth century," among which "the Capitula 
of Benedict Levita, Capitula Angilrammi, Canons of Isaac of 
Langres, above all the collection of Pseudo-Isidore" (/&. 285), 
which arch-forgery we shall describe in its turn. 


This famous, or infamous, official fabrication, "The Book of the 
Popes," is notorious for its spurious accounts of the early and mythi- 



cal "successors of St. Peter.* 9 The Liber Pontificalis purports to be "a 
history of the popes, beginning with St. Peter and continued down to 
the fifteenth century, in the form of biographies" of their respective 
Holinesses of Rome. (CE. ix, 224.) It is an official papal work, writ- 
ten and kept in the papal archives, and preserves for posterity the 
holy lives and wonderful doings of the heads of the Church universal. 
"Historical criticism," says CE., "has for a long time dealt with this 
ancient text in an exhaustive way . . . especially in recent decades." 
The Liber starts off in a typically fraudulent clerical manner : "In 
most of its manuscript copies there is found at the beginning a 
spurious correspondence between Pope Damasus and St. Jerome. 
These letters were considered genuine in the Middle Ages. . . . 
Duchesnehas proved exhaustively and convincingly that the first series 
of biographies, "from St. Peter to Felix III (IV, died 530) were com- 
piled at the latest under Felix's successor, Boniface II (530-532). 
. . The compiler of the Liber Pontificalis utilized also some histor- 
ical writings, a number of apocryphal fragments (e.g. the Pseudo- 
Clementine Recognitions), the Constitutum 'Sylvestri, the spurious 
Acts of the alleged Synod of the 275 Bishops under Sylvester, etc., 
and the fifth century Roman Acts of Martyrs. Finally, the compiler 
distributed arbitrarily along his list of popes a number of papal de- 
crees taken from unauthentic sources ; he likewise attributed to earlier 
popes liturgical and disciplinary regulations of the sixth century. 
. . The authors were Roman ecclesiastics, and some were attached 
to the Roman Court." (CE. ix, 225.) The general falsity of the Liber 
is again shown and the fraudulent use made of it by the later Church 
forgers, thus indicated : For instances, "in the 'Liber' it is recorded 
that such a pope issued a decree that has been lost, or mislaid, or per- 
haps never ea&sted at all. Isidore seized the opportunity to supply a 
pontifical letter suitable for the occasion, attributing it to the pope 
whose name was mentioned in the 'Liber.' " (CE. v. 774.) Thus con- 
fessed forgery and fraud taint to the core this basic record for some 
five centuries of the official "histories" and Acts of Their Holinesses of 
the primitive and adolescent years of the Holy Church. Pope Peter 
and his "Successors" for a century or more are thus again proven 
pious fictions and frauds. 


As several of the most monumental of these holy Church forgeries 
are associated with the first "Christian 55 Emperor, Constantine, and 
His contemporary Holiness, Pope Sylvester I (314-335), we may 
first notice the pious forged miracles which brought Constantine to 
Christ rather to the Christians, and thus blightingly changed the 
history of the world. Constantine, Augustus of Rome, was the bastard 
son of the Imperator Constantius Chlorus and a Bythnian barmaid 
who became his mistress, and, later, by virtue of opulent gifts to the 
Church, was raised to Heaven as St. Helena. Constantine was a pic- 
turesque "barbarian" Pagan, with a very bloody record of family 
and other murders to his credit, mostly made to further his political 
ambitions. He was rival of the four Caesars who shared the divided 
government, against whom he was engaged in titanic struggle, to win 
the sole crown of empire. The Christians were now become rather 
numerous in East and West, some two and a half or three millions 
out of the hundred millions of the Empire, sufficient to make their ad- 
herence and support important to the contestant who could gain 
control of them. To curry their favor and support Constantine 
adopted the tactics of his sportive father, Constantius, and made 
show of friendly disposition to them and even of possible adoption of 
the new faith. 

The occasion and the purely selfish and superstitious motive for 
the alliance of Constantine with the Christians and their God, are 
described by the three noted Church historians of the period, all 
writing after his death, Eusebius, Socrates and Sozomen, all of 
whom give substantially the following account, here abbreviated from 
Eusebius, "Father of Church History 9 " and an intimate of the Em- 
peror, in his ludicrously laudatory Life of Const online: 

"Being convinced that he needed some more powerful aid than his 
military forces could afford him, on account of the wicked and magical 
enchantments which were so diligently practiced by the tyrant 
Maxentius, he sought divine assistance, . . . He considered, there- 
fore, on what God he i mgkt rely -for protection and assistance* While 
engaged in this enquiry, the thought occurred to him, that, of the 



many emperors who had preceded him, who had rested their hopes 
on a multitude of gods, . . . none had profited at all by the pagan 
deities, whom they sought to propitiate ... all had at last met with 
an unhappy end, . . . while the God of his father had given to him, 
on the other hand, manifestations of his power. . . . Reviewing, I 
may say, all these considerations, he judged it to be folly indeed to join 
in the idle worship of those who were no gods, . . . and therefore felt 
it incumbent on him to honor his father's God alone." (Eusebius, Life 
of Constantine, I, 27; NfyPNF. I, 489; cf. Socrates, Eccles. Hist. I, 
2 ; Ib. II, 1-2 ; Sozomen, Eccles. Hist. I, 3 ; 16. p. 241.) So, Constan- 
tine chose the Christian's God to offset the "magical enchantments" of 
the Pagan gods in favor of his rival, Maxentius. The Christians 
flocked to his court and armies, and proud prelates of the Church hung 
around him and flattered his hopes. After several military successes 
aided by the Christians, the rival armies faced for decisive contest 
near the historic Milvian Bridge, in the environs of Rome, in the year 
312. All are familiar with the fabulous priestly story of the miracu- 
lous Fiery Cross said to have been hung out in heaven just before the 
battle in the sight of Constantine and all his army, blazing with the 
famous device "In Hoc Signo Vmces By this Sign Conquer" 
though it was in Greek and read "En Touto Nika," and by virtue 
of which Constantine was himself conquered for Christ or for His 

Here we may again see the "god in the machine" a pious Chris- 
tian fraud in the making, and watch its growth from nothing in pro- 
portion of wonder from lying Father to Father as it is handed on. 
Very remarkable it is, that Father Bishop Eusebius wholly omits this 
portentous event, though he devotes a large part of Book IX and all 
of Book X of his History of the Church (written in 324), to Constan- 
tine, and enthusiastically describes the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. 
Although he lugs divine intervention by the Christian God into every 
phase of the campaign, he is content with this colorful, naive, account : 
"But the emperor (Constantine), stimulated by the divine assistance, 
proceeded against the tyrant, and defeating him in the first, second, 
and third engagements, he advanced through the greatest part of 
Italy, and came almost to the very gates of Rome. Then God himself 
drew the tyrant [Maxentius], as if bound in fetters, to a considerable 

distance from the gates [i.e. to the Milvian Bridge] ; and here He con- 
firmed those miraculous events performed of old against the wicked, 
and which have been discredited by so many, as if belonging to fiction 
and fable, but which have been established in the sacred volume, as 
credible to the believer. He confirmed them, I say, as true, by an im- 
mediate interposition of his power, addressed alike I may say to the 
eyes of believers and unbelievers. As, therefore, anciently in the days 
of Moses, the chariots of Pharaoh and his forces were cast into 
the Red Sea, thus also Maxentius, and his combatants and guards 
about him, sunk into the depths like a stone, when he fled before the 
power of God which was with Constantine." And, in commemoration 
of such signal divine aid, Constantine "immediately commanded a 
trophy of the Saviour's passion [a Cross] to be placed in the hand 
of his own statue** in Rome. (Eusebius, HE. IX, ix, p. 397-9,) 
And with all this miraculous embellishment, not a word of the 
Fiery Cross in Heaven, nor of the "miraculous conversion" of Con- 

The pious fable, whether by him invented or not, is first recorded by 
Father Lactantius, tutor to Constantine's son Crispus before the pious 
father murdered his son ; he tells it after Constantine's death in its 
primitive and more modest form a simple dream by night, in which 
Jesus the Christ appeared to Constantine, and was seen or heard 
or was fabled to tell Constantine to decorate the shields of his sol- 
diers with the holy "sign of the Cross" before they went into the fight ; 
this he did and won the battle post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Constan^ 
tine may perhaps quite naturally have had such a dream dreams have 
many vagaries, and the priests were ever at his ear. But the **heavenly 
sign," the Labarum or Monogram of Christ, which Constantine was 
by divine revelation or priestly suggestion directed to place on the 
shields of his soldiers, was no novel thing requiring a divine revelation, 
even in a dream, to suggest to the Christian priests of a Pagan em- 
peror; "for it had been a familiar Christian symbol prior to his con- 
version." (CE. viii, 718.) By a" similar divine revelation or priest- 
prompting, the Persian Cambyses had tied cats to the shields of his 
soldiers in their campaign in 525 B. c, against the cat-worshipping 
Egyptians, who thus dared not strike with their swords ; the Chris- 
tians worshipped the Cross of which the Pagans were superstitiously 



afraid, as we have seen from Father Lactantius. The result was at 
least the same, as related by Father Lactantius : 

"And now a civil war broke out between Constantine and Maxentius. 
... At length Constantine ... led his whole forces to the neighbor- 
hood of Rome, and encamped them opposite to the Milvian Bridge. 
. . . Constantine was directed in a dream to cause the heavenly sign 
to be delineated on the shields of his soldiers, and to proceed to battle. 
He did as he had been commanded, and he marked on their shields the 
letter X, with a perpendicular line drawn through it and turned round 
thus at the top, being the cipher of Christ. . . . The bridge in the rear 
(of Maxentius) was broken down. The hand of the Lord prevailed, and 
the forces of Maxentius were routed." (Lact., On the Death of the 
Persecutors, ch. xliv; ANF. vii, 318.) 

These Christ-monogram crosses were probably, to the mind's eye 
of Lactantius, simple wooden or painted miniatures like the more life- 
sized one which a modern Holiness specially exorcised and sent along 
as an amulet or pious fetich of success on a recent disastrous Polar 
Expedition. But by the time Bishop Eusebius came on to embellish the 
tale, the model at least was a thing truly of beauty and wonder. In his 
Life of Constantine, the holy Bishop, who was on the Emperor's pay- 
roll, thus in substance relates : 

"Constantine, having resolved to liberate Rome from the tyranny 
of Maxentius, and having meditated on the unhappiness of those who 
worshipped a multitude of idols, as contrasted with the good fortune 
of his own father Constantius, who had favoured Christianity, re- 
solved to worship the One True God ; and while he was in prayer to 
God that He would reveal Himself to him, and stretch forth His right 
hand to succor him, he had a vision after midday, when the sun was 
declining, in a luminous form over the sun, and an inscription annexed 
to it, 'Touto Nika' (by this conquer) , and at the sight of it he and 
all his forces were astounded, who were spectators of the miracle. . . . 
The following night, when Constantine was asleep, Christ appeared 
to him with that sign, which had beerf displayed to him in the heavens, 
and commanded him to make a standard according to the pattern of 
what he had seen, and to use it as a defense against his enemies ; and 
as soon as it was day Constantine called together the workers in gold 
and precious stones, and ordered them to fashion it accordingly" 


(it being, by his description, certainly rich, if not gaudy). And Bishop 
Eusebins states that Constantine, "a long time after the event, af- 
firmed with an oath the truth of what the Bishop had recorded" of 
this wonderful unhistorical fact. (Eusebius, Life of Constantine, I, 
26-31 ; N&PNF. i, 489-491 ; CE. viii, 717-8 ; Wordsworth, op. cit. 
i, 358-9.) In a note to the last reference, the acute Protestant clerical 
mind, in eager defense of even the most absurd Catholic fables, is seen 
at play : "It has been objected (by Dean Milman and others) that it 
is incredible that a warlike motto on the Cross, converted into a mili- 
tary standard, should be suggested by Him who is Prince of Peace. 
But He Who is Prince of Peace is also Lord of Hosts ; and Christ is re- 
vealed not only in the Psalms, but also in the Apocalypse, as a Mighty 
Warrior going forth conquering and to conquer." Clerical persons are 
really Funny-mentalists ! 

The pious Bishop Eusebius, exemplar of Christian historical un- 
veracity to the glory of God and Church, begins his Life of Constan- 
tine with this rhapsody over Constantine dead: "When I raise my 
thoughts even to the arch of heaven, and there contemplate his thrice- 
blessed soul in communion with God himself, freed from every mortal 
and earthly vesture, and shining in a refulgent robe of light, honoured 
with an ever-blooming crown, and an immortality of endless and 
blessed existence, I stand as it were without power of speech or thought 
and unable to utter a single phrase, but condemning my own weakness, 
and imposing silence on myself, I resign the task of speaking his 
praises worthily to the immortal God, who alone has power to confirm 
his own sayings/* (Eusebius, Life, I, 2 ; N&PNF. i, 481-2.) 

Here is the thrice-blessed Holy Emperor's record before he was 
"freed from every mortal and earthly vesture," and before his blood- 
stained earthly vestments were exchanged for that refulgent robe of 
light in which he communed with God himself ; this record is of the 
one item only of family murderings : Maximian, his wife's father, 310; 
Bassianus, his sister Anastasia's husband, 314; Licinianus, his 
nephew, son of his sister Constantina, 319 ; Fausta, his wife, in a bath 
of boiling water, 320; Sopater, Pagan philosopher and his former 
intimate Counsellor, 321 ; Licinius, his colleague Caesar and his sister 
Constantina's husband, 325 ; with this last, and the beheading of his 
own son Crispus, 326, he fitly inaugurated and consecrated the cele- 


brated Council of Nicsea, which he invoked to settle the famous puzzle, 
whether Jesus Christ, the Son, being born of the Father, were not 
consequently less ancient than his Sire, so that there was a time when 
the Begotten Son did not exist, and whether they were "of the same 
substance," or different. It may be noticed, that the devout "Chris- 
tian" Emperor regarded this as a trifling matter of dispute not justi- 
fying the terrible row which it kicked up among the clericals, splitting 
the subjects of the Empire into throat-cutting factions for four 
centuries. In his opening Address to the Council which he called to 
establish peace among the priests, he turned to Alexander, Bishop of 
Alexandria, and to Arius, his presbyter, and their respective howling 
factions, and declared: "I understand, then, that the origin of this 
controversy is this [the question stated by Alexander on this point, 
and the negative reply of Arius], Let therefore both the unguarded 
question and the inconsiderate answer receive your mutual forgiveness. 
. . . For as long as you continue to contend about these small and in- 
significant questions, it is not fitting that- so large a portion of God's 
people should be under the direction of your judgment, since you are 
thus divided among yourselves" ! (Eusebius, Life of Constantine, II, 
69-71 ; N&PNF. i, 516-7.) 

With respect to the Christian Emperor's murderings, the good 
Bishop Lardner, with truly Christian modern moderation, admits 
that the murderous atrocities of Constantine above listed "seem to 
cast a reflection upon him"! But the holy Emperor was truly 
conscientious and scrupulously concerned for his soul's salvation on 
account of them ; for it is recorded by the Church historian Sozomen, 
that Constantine is said to have sought first Pagan, then Christian, 
absolution from these murders, first from Sopater, then from the 
Christian bishops. He relates the anxious solicitations of the murderer 
thus : "It is reported by the Pagans that Constantine, after slaying 
some of his nearest relations, and particularly after assenting to the 
murder of his own son Crispus, repented of the evil deeds, and inquired 
of Sopater, the philosopher, concerning the means of purification from 
guilt. The philosopher, so the story goes, replied that such moral de- 
filement could admit of no purification. The Emperor was grieved at 
this repulse ; but happening to meet some bishops who told him that 
he would be cleansed from sin, on repentance and on baptism, he was 


delighted with their representations, and admired their doctrines, and 
became a Christian, and led his subjects to the same faith. It appears 
to me that this story was the invention of persons -who desired to vilify 
the Christian religion. ... It cannot be imagined the philosopher 
was ignorant that Hercules obtained purification at Athens by the 
celebration of the mysteries of Ceres after the murder of his children, 
and of Iphitus, his guest and friend. That the Greeks held that purifi- 
cation from guilt of this nature could be obtained, is obvious from the 
instance I have just alleged, and he is a false calumniator who repre- 
sents that Sopater taught the contrary, . . -for he was at that period 
esteemed the most learned man in Greece." (Sozomen, i, 5; ii, 242-3.) 
It is said that the rebuff of Sopater denying Pagan absolution was 
the motive of his murder by the Christian Emperor. Howbeit, Con- 
stantine cautiously denied himself the saving Christian rite of baptism 
until he was on his deathbed, in Nicomedia, in the year of his forgiving 
Lord 337. (Euseb., Life, iv, 62; Soc., i, 39; Soz., ii, 34; CE. i, 709.) 
But none can deny the superiority of Christianity over Paganism in 
this point of saving grace. The Christian historian, however, clearly 
avers that some of the divinest sacraments of Christian Revelation, 
forgiveness of sin by God and absolution per priests, were ancient 
features of the Pagan "Mysteries," of which even sinful Pagan demi- 
gods might be the beneficiaries. 

But "the mighty and victorious Constantine, adorned with every 
virtue of religion, with his most pious son, Crispus Caesar, resembling 
in everything his father," as his doxology is sung before the mur- 
der of Crispus by good Bishop Eusebius (HE. ix, p 443), was 
rather dubiously a "practicing' 5 Christian; he remained until death 
Pontifex Maximus, or Sovereign Pontiff of the Pagan religion, a title 
which the Christian Bishops could not erogate until the Christian 
Emperors abandoned it ; he ordered the auspices or divination by in- 
spection of the entrails of birds, and on his death, amply baptized 
with blood and by the deathbed heretic Christian rite, he was apotheo- 
sized according to Pagan custom and raised as a god to heaven to 
rank along with his Christian Sainted Mother, St. Helena, of whom 
more anon. 

In this ecstatic vision of the celestial beatitude of Constantine, the 
good Bishop Eusebius was, from the orthodox or "right-thinking" 


viewpoint sadly mistaken. Constantine went unshriven to Hell and 
everlasting torment ; not indeed for his crimes but for his errant creed, 
as a disbeliever in the Divinity of Jesus Christ and in the Holy Trinity 
which, indeed, had not been yet invented. The majority of the 
Council of Nicaea had by force and terrorism decreed that Jesus 
Christ was of the "same substance" as his father God, co-eternal and 
co-equal, ergo also God. But Constantine heretically disbelieved this 
inspired dogma ; he banished Athanasius and other "Trinitarian," pre- 
lates ; even "the death of Arius did not stay the plague. Constantine 
now favored none but Arians ; he was baptized in his last moments 
by the shifty [Arian] prelate of Nicomedia ; and he bequeathed to 
his three sons [themselves either Pagans or Arian heretics] an empire 
torn by dissensions which his weakness and ignorance had aggra- 
vated." (CE. i, 709.) To such a "weak and ignorant" Emperor is due, 
however, the salvation of Christianity from oblivion, and upon him is 
lavished the adulations of the now "indefectible Church" which his 
favor alone made possible. As for the pious Bishop Eusebius, he was 
himself an Arian heretic, and from his point of view he may have 
thought that he visioned Constantine glorious in Heaven. So much 
for divergent religious standpoints, which at the first Church Council 
^'proved a beginning of strife, . . . bequeathed an empire torn with 
dissensions, . . . [until] the Catholic bishops, the monks, the sword 
of Clovis, and the action of the Papacy, made an end of it before the 
eighth century" (CE. i, 710), thus nearly four hundred years of 
throat-cutting and persecutions before Constantine was finally proved 
a villainous heretic, the fatal effects of his "weakness and ignorance" 
overcome, and "Catholic Truth" began to assume its full sway undis- 
puted through the long intellectual night of the Christian Dark 
Ages of Faith. 


The 'league with D'eath and covenant with Hell" whereby the 
new Paganism called Christianity became the official State religion 
being now signed and sealed, and soon enforced by laws of bloody 
persecution, we shall now admire the most monumental of the holy 
forgeries by which the Church consolidated its vast and nefast 


dominion over the minds and bodies of the quickly degraded popula- 
tions under its sway. 


A series of Church forgeries of the greatest magnitude and most 
far-reaching evil consequences grew up around the name of Constan- 
tine, forged in his name or falsely associated with it in the nefarious 
work of almost limitless larceny of territorial possessions and of 
papal sovereignty. A bit of historical background is necessary to prop- 
erly appreciate the underground workings of Providence in dispos- 
ing the success of these designs, whereby, as said by Dr. McCabe, 
"Pope Adrian I induced Charlemagne to found the papal states by 
producing two of the most notorious and most shameless forgeries 
ever perpetrated : *The Acts of St. Sylvester/ and *The Donation of 
Constantine,* documents which mendaciously represented the emperor 
Constantine as giving most of Italy to the papacy, and which were 
fabricated in Rome in the eighth century and were used by the popes 
to maintain this gigantic fraud." 

The intricate intriguing and conspiracies of the embryo papacy 
under their Holine&ses Zacharias, Stephen II, Adrian I, Leo III, and 
of the semi-barbarian aspirants for the Frankish monarchy, Clovis, 
Charles Martel, Pepin, Charlemagne, cannot be here recounted. Ac- 
cording to the picturesque account of Bishop St. Gregory of Tours 
whose History is a thesaurus of the revolting social and moral deg- 
radation of the times, Clovis was converted as the result of his vow 
to the God of his Christian wife Clotilda, that if victory were granted 
to him in a great battle against the Alemanni, in which he was hard 
pressed, he would become a Christian. Miracles at once attested the 
Divine favor : "St. Martin showed him a ford over the Vienne by means 
of a hind ; St. Hilary preceded his armies in a column of fire." (Von 
Ranke, i, 12.) It will be remembered that all the barbarian nations of 
the time were "heretic" Christians of the hated Arian sect, who denied 
the divinity of Christ and derided the Holy Trinity ; the Franks thus 
became the only "orthodox" Christians and the defenders of the True 
Faith on behalf of the Popes. Winning the fight, Clovis and 3000 of 
his army were baptized on Christmas day by Bishop St. Remigius of 



Rheims, When this good Bishop came to perform the baptismal cere- 
mony on the king in the cathedral of Rheims, "the chrism for the 
baptismal ceremony was missing, and was brought from heaven in a 
vase (ampulla) borne by a dove. This is what is known as the Sainte 
Ampoule of Rheims, preserved in the treasury of the Cathedral of 
that City, and used for the coronation of the kings of France from 
Philip Augustus down to Charles X" ! (CE. v, 71.) 


The Merovingian kings of the Franks had become mere puppets in 
the hands of their "Mayors of the Palace," in league with the bishops 
of Rome. At last "Pepin addressed to the pope the suggestive ques- 
tion : *In regard to the Kings of the Franks who no longer possess 
the royal power, is this state of things proper?' . . . Pope Zacharias 
replied that such a state of things was not proper [that "he should 
be king who possessed the royal power"] . After this decision the place 
Pepin desired was declared vacant. . . . Still this external cooper- 
ation of the pope in the transfer of the Kingdom would necessarily 
enhcunce the importance of the Church. Pepin was also obliged to 
acknowledge the increased power of the Church by calling on it for 
moral [?] support." (CE. xi, 663.) In pay or reward for this 
"moral support" given by the Church, Pepin, it is said, gave to the 
Church some considerable territories around Rome, which at the 
incitation of the Pope he had wrested by arms from the neighboring 


To this alleged gift Pepin was induced not alone by the sentiment 
of guilty gratitude to Zacharias and Stephen, the latter of whom 
crowned him King of the Franks in 751 ; for further persuasion His 
Holiness Stephen IL procured from the Vatican Forgery Mill the 
identical autograph letter of St. Peter himself, prophetically ad- 
dressed "To the King of the Franks," and so mystically worded that : 
"When Stephen II performed the ceremony of anointing Pepin and 
his son at St. Denis, it was St. Peter who was regarded as the mystical 
giver of the secular power"! (CE. xi, 663.) This cunning Papal 


forgery and fraud is thus described by a high authority : "The pontiff 
. . , dictated his letter in the name of the apostle Peter, closely 
imitating his epistles, and speaking in a language which implied that 
he was possessed of an authority to anoint or dethrone kings, and to 
perform the offices, not of a messenger, of a teacher sent from God, 
which is the highest characteristic of an apostle, but of a delegated 
minister of His power and justice." (Historians 9 History of the 
World, vol. viii, p. 557.) 

Also : "The Frankish king received the title of the former represen- 
tative of the Byzantine Empire in Italy, i. e. Tatricius,* and was also 
assigned the duty of protecting the prvtAleges of the Holy See. ... 
After the acknowledgment of his territorial claims the pope was in 
reality a ruling sovereign, but he had placed himself under the protec- 
tion of the Frankish ruler, and had sworn that he and his people would 
be true to the king" (CJ3. xi, 663) , the divine birthright thus swapped 
for a mess of political potage: for over a thousand years since it has 
been a mess indeed. Thus by conspiracy, fraud, and unrighteous con- 
quest was laid the foundation of the sacred "Patrimony of Peter," 
and the unholy league between the papacy and the French kings, which 
reached full fruition in the holy massacres of the Albigenses, of the 
Vendee, and of St. Bartholomew. 


The next step in the progress "conquering and to conquer" of 
Christ's prostituted Church was on a broader stage and with yet 
vaster consequences. Pepin died in 768, dividing his realms between his 
two sons, Carloman and Charles, later "by the Grace of God" and 
great villainy known to fame as Charles the Great or Charlemagne ; 
Charles receiving the German part, Carloman the French. On the 
death of Carloman, in 771, Charles seized the Frankish kingdom. The 
widow and young heirs of Carloman fled for protection and aid to 
Desiderius, king of the Lombards, part of whose stolen territory the 
pope held for God and Church. Desiderius was also father of the re- 
pudiated first wife of Charles; the holy matrimonial mess is thus 
defined : "Charles was already, in foro consdentia, if not in Frankish 
law, wedded to Himiltrude. In defiance of the pope's protest, Charles 



married Desiderata, daughter of Desiderius (770) ; three years later 
he repudiated her and married Hildegarde, the beautiful Swabian. 
Naturally, Desiderius was furious at this insult, and the dominions 
of the Holy See bore the first brunt of his wrath." (CE. iii, 612.) 
Charles thereupon "had to protect Rome against the Lombard"; 
finally the Lombards were "put to utter rout" ; Charles proceeded 
to Rome; and "history records with vivid eloquence the first visit 
of Charles to the Eternal City. . . . Charles himself forgot pagan 
Rome and prostrated himself to kiss the threshold of the Apostles, 
and then spent seven days in conference with the successor of Peter. 
It was then that he undoubtedly formed many great designs for the 
glory of God cmd the exaltation of Holy Church, which, in spite of 
human weaknesses, and, still more, ignorance, he did his best to real- 
ize." (76. 612.) The principal fruit of this weakness and ignorance 
of Charles seems to be that he could so easily let himself be duped by 
His Holiness through the enormous forgeries for Christ's sake that 
were now imposed upon him. In 774 Charles finally defeated Desiderius 
and "assumed the crown of Lombardy, and renewed to Adrian [now 
Holiness of Rome] the donation of territory made by Pepin." The 
"genuineness of this donation," as well as of "the original gift of 
Pepin," have been much questioned, says CE., but are "now generally 
admitted," which is none too assuring; but another document, this 
time favorable to Charles, is just the other way: "The so-called 
*Privilegium Hadriani pro Carolo* granting him full right to nomi- 
nate the pope and to invest all bishops, is a -forgery" (CE. xi, 612). 
Here is precisely the reason and only effective use of this forged 
"Donation of Constantine" it was the basis for the inducement to 
Charlemagne to win the Lombard territories for the Church and to 
reinstate it in the "Patrimony of Peter," largely swollen by the pre- 
tended new gifts of the ambitious king, who, in the seven days' con- 
ference with His Holiness, had, undoubtedly, formed together "some 
great designs for the glory of God and the exaltation of Holy Church," 
now begun to be realized. 

The quarter of a century passed, and much history was made. 
The Roman emperors ruled from Constantinople ; Roman popes and 
kings were legitimately their liegemen; "the Emperor of Constan- 
tinople, legitimate heir of the imperial title," now becomes the victim 


of papal and kingly conspiration, thus brought to its climax: "On 
Christmas Day, 800, took place the principal event of the life of 
Charles. During the Pontifical Mass celebrated before the high altar 
beneath which lay the bodies of Sts. Peter and Paul, the pope (Leo 
III) approached him, placed upon his head the imperial crown, did 
him formal reverence after the ancient manner, saluted him as Em- 
peror and Augustus and anointed him," while the Roman rabble 
shouted its approval. Thus, again by collusion and usurpation, began 
that Holy Roman Empire, of nefast history, which Bryce qualifies 
as "neither holy, nor Roman, nor empire" ; but the Vicars of God were 
now well started on their way to worldly grandeur and moral degrada- 
tion. Now for their forgeries. 


The monumental forgeries which were boldly used by their Holi- 
nesses to dupe Charlemagne and Christendom into recognizing the 
papal claim of right of ownership and sovereignty over a great part 
of Italy are a series of spurious documents harking in pretended date 
and origin back to the "first Christian emperor 39 Constantine and 
to His Holiness Pope St. Sylvester (314-335). About the name of 
Sylvester arose "the Sylvester Legend later surrounded with that 
network of myth, that gave rise to the forged document known as the 
Donation of Constantine." (CE. xiv, 257.) This fable, says Prof. 
Shotwell, "made its way, gathering volume as it went, reenforced 
eventually by a forged Donation, until it had imposed upon all Europe 
the conception of Sylvester as the potent influence behind Constan- 
tine's most -striking measures and of Constantine himself as the duti- 
ful servant of the See of Peter* 5 * (See of Peter* xxvi.) The extensive 
variety but common general nature of these Sylvester forgeries is 
thus indicated: 

"At an early date legend brings Pope St. Sylvester into close rela- 
tionship with the first Christian emperor, but in a way that is con- 
trary to historical fact. These legends were introduced especially 
into the *Vita beati Sylvestri, 9 and in the *Constitutum Sylvestri' an 
apocryphal account of an alleged Roman council which belongs to 
the Symmachian forgeries and appeared between 501 and 508, and 



also in the 'Donatio Constantini.' The accounts given in all these 
writings concerning the persecution of Sylvester, the healing and 
baptism of Constantine, the emperor's gift to the pope, the rights 
granted to the latter, and the council of 275 bishops at Rome, are 
entirely legendary" (CE. xiv, 370-371). 


"Ah, Constantine ! to how much ill gave birth, 
Not thy conversion, but that plenteous dower, 
Which the first wealthy Father gained from thee!" 

Dante, Inferno, xix, 115. 

The Catholic Encyclopedia, artless revealer of the frauds of the 
Church for which it is an authorized spokesman, gives this account 
of the famous Donatio Constantino which is describes as "a forged 
document of Emperor Constantine the Great, by which large privi- 
leges and rich possessions were conferred on the pope and the Roman 
Church. . . . It is addressed by Constantine to Pope Sylvester I 
(31435), and consists of two parts. . . . Constantine is made to 
confer on Sylvester and his successors the following privileges and 
possessions : the pope, as successor of St. Peter, has the primacy over 
the four Patriarchs of Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and 
Jerusalem, also over all the bishops in the world. . . . The docu- 
ment goes on to say that for himself the Emperor has established in 
the East a new capital which bears his name, and thither he removes 
his capital, since it is inconvenient that a secular emperor have power 
where God has established the residence of the head of the Christian 
religion. The document concludes with maledictions against all who 
violate these donations and with the assurance that the emperor has 
signed them with his own hand and placed them on the tomb of Sf. 
Peter. This document is without doubt a forgery, fabricated some- 
where between the years 750 and 850. As early as the 15th century 
its falsity was known and demonstrated. ... Its genuimty was yet 
occasionally defended, and the document stitt further used as authen- 
tic, until Baronius in his Annales Ecclesiastici admitted that the 
TDonatio' was a forgery, whereafter it was soon universally admitted 
to be such. It is so clearly a fabrication that there is no reason to 


wonder that, with the revival of historical criticism in the 15th cen- 
tury, the true character of the document was at once recognized. . . . 
The document obtained wider circulation by its incorporation with 
the Take Decretals' (840-850) . (CE. v, 118, 119, 120.) 

By Lord Bryce a graphic sketch of this notorious fraud is given, 
with comments as to the mental and moral qualities of the priestcraft 
which it reflects. It is, he says, the "most stupendous of medieval 
forgeries, which under the name of Donation of Constantine com- 
manded for seven centuries the unquestioning belief of mankind. Itself 
a portentous falsehood, it is the most unimpeachable evidence of the 
thoughts and beliefs of the priesthood which framed it, sometime be- 
tween the middle of the eighth and the middle of the tenth century. 
It tells how Constantine the Great, cured of his leprosy by the prayers 
of Sylvester, resolved, on the fourth day of his baptism, to forsake the 
ancient seat for a new capital on the Bosphorus, lest the continuance 
of the secular government should cramp the freedom of the spiritual, 
and how he bestowed therewith upon the Pope and his successors the 
sovereignty over Italy and the countries of the West. 55 (Bryce, Holy 
Roman Empire, Ch. vii, p. 97; Latin text, extracts, p. 98.) In addi- 
tion to these extraordinary investitures, all forms of imperial pomp, 
privileges and dignities were spuriously granted to the Pope and his 
clerics, "all of them enjoyed by the Emperor and his senate, all of 
them showing the same desire to make the pontifical a copy of the 
imperial office. The Pope is to inhabit the Lateran palace, to wear 
the diadem, the collar, the purple cloak, to carry the scepter, and to be 
attended by a body of chamberlains. Similarly his clergy are to ride 
on white horses and receive the honors and immunities of the senate 
and patricians, 55 including "the practice of kissing the pope 5 s foot, 
adopted in imitation of the old imperial court. 55 (76. pp. 97-98. ) 

The grossness and absurdity of these stupendous forgeries, with 
their pious recitals of Constantine 5 s leprosy cured by Sylvester's 
prayers, the consequent conversion and baptism of the Emperor in 
the Lateran font, and the abandonment of Rome by Constantine in 
order to leave it free for God 5 s Vicar, just up from the catacombs, 
to ape imperial pomp, is made manifest by a moment's notice of dates, 
and recollection of contemporary history. Sylvester's Holiness dates 
from 314, he died in 335 ; Constantine in 337. Constantino's "conver- 



sion" by the "In Hoc Signo" miracle, was in 312, before Sylvester 
became pope; at no time did Constantine have leprosy, other than 
moral, therefore no physical cure was wrought by Sylvester's prayers, 
and certainly no moral cleansing worthy of note ; Constantine was not 
baptized by Sylvester in Rome, but heretically received that rite long 
after Sylvester's death, and just before his own, in Nicomedia of 
Asia Minor. (CE. i, 709.) But Christians were too sodden in ignorance 
to know these things, and it was only with the "revival of historical 
criticism" which marked the beginning of the end of the Ages of 
Faith, that the truth was disclosed, or could have been perceived* In 
words that blast and sear with infamy the perpetrators and the con- 
scious beneficiaries of this monumental fraud and forgery. Gibbon 

"Fraud is the resource of weakness and cunning ; and the strong, 
though ignorant barbarian, was often entangled in the net of sacer- 
dotal policy. . . . The Decretal and the Donation of Constantine, the 
two magical pillars of the spiritual and temporal monarchy of the 
popes. This memorable donation was first introduced to the world by 
an epistle of Adrian the first, who exhorts Charlemagne to imitate the 
liberality, and revive the name, of the great Constantine. ... So 
deep was- the ignorance and credulity of the times, that the most ab- 
surd of fables was received, with equal reverence, in Greece and in 
France, and is still enrolled among the decrees of the canon law. The 
emperors, and the Romans, were incapable of discerning a forgery, 
that subverted their rights and freedom. . . . The popes themselves 
have indulged a smile at the credulity of the vulgar ; but a false and 
obsolete title still sanctifies their reign; and, by the same fortune 
which has attended the decretals and the Sibylline Oracles, the edifice 
has subsisted after the -fowndations have been undermined." (Gibbon, 
Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, ch. xiv, pp. 740, 741, 742.) 

The falsity of the Donation was first alleged and proved, in 1440, 
by the acute Humanist critic Lorenzo Valla, who has the exposure of 
more than one Church forgery to his credit, and who narrowly escaped 
the Holy Inquisition ; and yet the document "was still used as authen- 
tic" by Holy Church until the great Churchman critic Baronius forced 
the confession of the fraud, but the Church still for centuries clung to 
the fruits of its fraud, and would not give them up, with .their revenues 


and rotten "sovereignty." The ancient forgery of "Donation" was 
finally canceled by Italian patriot bayonets in 1870, and the stolen 
territories of "Peter's Patrimony" restored to United Italy. That 
these Papal territories were not of "divine" right, nor of even forged 
muniments which can be plausibly urged, is thus confessed: "All of 
this, of course, is based upon painstaking deductions since no document 
has come down to us either from the time of Charlemagne or from 
that of Pepin." (CE. xiv, 261.) This is confirmed, and the precarious 
nature of the usurped tenure thus stated : "Nominally, Adrian I (772- 
775) was now monarch of about two-thirds of the Italian peninsula, 
but his sway was little more than nominal. ... It was in no slight 
degree owing to Adrian's political sagacity, vigilance, and activity, 
that the temporal power of the Papacy did not remain a fiction of the 
Imagination. . . . The temporal power of the popes, of which Adrian 
I must be considered the real founder." (CE. i, 155-156.) 

In a paragraph which gives a word of credit to Valla for his ex- 
posure of the forgeries of the "Donation" and the immense and re- 
markable "Pseudo-Areopagite" Forgeries, previously mentioned, the 
vast extent of the output of the Vatican Forgery-Mill and the evil 
persistence of the Church in clinging to them after exposure, is thus 
admitted: "Lorenzo Valla, 1440, counselled Eugenius IV not to rely 
on the Donation of Constantine, which he proved to be spurious. . . . 
It was Valla who first denied the authenticity of those writings which 
for centuries had been going about as the treatises composed by Diony- 
sius the Areopagite. Three centuries later the Benedictines of St. 
Maur and the Bollandists were stiU engaged m sifting out the true 
from the false in patristic literature, in hagiology, in the story of the 
foundation of local churches" (CE. xii, 768), such Liars of the 
Lord were the pious parasites of Holy Church. 


Among the sheaf of forged documents above confessed by CE. are 
the so-called "Symmachian Forgeries," forged by or in behoof of 
His Holiness Pope St. Symmachus (498-514), products of the Church 
Forgery Mill operated by the Pope to further papal pretentions of 
the independence of the Bishops of Rome from the just criticisms and 



judgment of ecclesiastical tribunals, and putting them above law 
clerical and secular. Whenever there was need for false precedents, 
a simple turn of the crank of the wheel of the papal forgery-mill pro- 
duced them just to order. Thus, in this instance: "During the dispute 
between Pope St. Symmachus and the anti-pope Laurentius, the ad- 
herents of Symmachus drew up four apocryphal writings called the 
'Symmachian Forgeries'. . . . The object of these forgeries was to 
produce alleged instances from earlier times to support the whole 
procedure of the adherents of Symmachus, and, in particular, the 
position that the Roman bishop could not be judged by any court 
composed of other bishops." (CE. xiv, 378.) Our Confessor is careful 
twice to impute these confessed forgeries to the "adherents" of His 
Holiness; but they were forged for him, used, of course with his 
knowledge and consent, to further his cause in the dispute ; they are 
thus distinctly forgeries by His Holiness. 


A "record of forgery in the interest of the Church which resembles 
nothing else in history," in the words of Dr. McCabe, has so far been 
presented ; the climax and capstone is now to be seen in what Voltaire 
terms -"the boldest and most magnificent forgery which has deceived 
the world for centuries," the so-called "False Decretals of Isidore." 
While it is true, as said by Reinach, that "never yet has the papacy 
acknowledged that for 1000 years it made use of forged documents 
for its own benefit," yet we have seen a thousand confessions of the 
fact of forgery, and either the admission or the inevitable inference, 
that they were used by the Church in the fraudulent obtention of 
viciously illicit ends. The following brief paragraph of further con- 
fession from CE.y is pregnant with suggestion of the moral depravity 
of popes and priests, the whole Church, the sodden ignorance of the 
votaries of Holy Church, cleric and lay, the darkness of the life of 
mind and spirit till at the "Renaissance" men were reborn indeed, 
and after slow and painful growth of learning and of freeing from 
fear, began to expose the Church in its forgeries, frauds, and vices. 
The tone of CE. is quite apologetical for this particular monument of 
Church fraud; it seeks palliation in the conditions of ignorance of 


the Middle Ages ; but it forgets that Holy Church purposely pro- 
duced this ignorance, and that Popes and Church are illumined by the 
Holy Ghost of their God against all ignorance and error so that its 
"Church never has erred and never shall 5 * : but maybe this statement 
is itself an error. CE. now speaks for this gigantic fraud of Holy 
Church, the False Isidorian Decretals : 

"Isidorian Decretals is the name given to certain apocryphal 
letters contained in a collection of canon laws composed about the 
middle of the ninth century. . , Nowadays every one agrees that 
these so-called papal letters are -forgeries. These documents, about 
100 in number 9 appeared suddenly in the ninth century and are no- 
where mentioned before that time. . . . The pseudo-Isidore makes 
use of documents written long after the times of the popes to whom 
he attributed them. The popes of the first three centuries are made 
to quote documents that did not appear until the fourth or fifth 
century, etc. Then again there are endless anachronisms. The Middle 
Ages were deceived by this huge forgery, but during the Renaissance 
men of learning and the canonists generally began to recognize the 
fraud. . . . Nevertheless the official edition of the 'Corpus Juris,* in 
1580, upheld the genuineness of the false decretals." (CE. vi, 773.) 
But the God-guided Vicars of God knew they were forgeries. 

"Upon these spurious decretals," says Hallam, "was built the 
great fabric of papal supremacy over the different national churches ; 
a fabric which has stood after its foundations crumbled beneath it; 
for no one has pretended to deny, for the last two centuries, that the 
imposture is too palpable for any but the most ignorant ages to 
credit." (History of the Middle Ages, BL VII, ch. ii, 99.) Though 
on their face affecting only matters spiritual and causes ecclesiastical, 
they soon had all Europe strangled as in the tentacles of a giant 
octopus, by a process thus described by Lord Bryce : "By the inven- 
tion and adoption of the False Decretals it (the Church) had pro- 
vided itself with a legal system suited to any emergency, and which 
gave it unlimited authority through the Christian world in causes 
spiritual and over persons ecclesiastical. Canonical ingenuity found 
it easy in one way or another to make this include all causes and 
persons whatsoever ; for crime is always and wrong is often sin, nor 
can aught be done anywhere which may not affect the clergy." (Holy 



Roman Empire, ch. x, 152.) "The Forgery," says Dr. Draper, "pro- 
duced an immense extension of papal power, it displaced the old 
Church government, divesting it of the republican attributes it had 
possessed, and transforming it into an absolute monarchy. It brought 
the bishops into subjection to Rome, and made the pontiff the supreme 
judge of the whole Christian world. It prepared the way for the great 
attempt, subsequently made by Hildebrand, to convert the states of 
Europe into a theocratic priest-kingdom, with the pope at its head." 
(Conflict between Religion and Science, ch. x, 271.) 

The false pretense back of the huge forgery was that the documents 
included were genuine papal letters and decretals of the earliest popes, 
thus carrying back the Church's late pretensions to the very first of 
the Church and to the pretended and fictitious associates and "suc- 
cessors" of Peter. These spurious documents are taken up seriatim 
by the critical Father Dupin 3 as outlined in ANF., viii, and each in 
its turn pronounced a forgery. From the "Introductory Notice to 
the Decretals," I think it pertinent to quote the following paragraph : 

"These frauds, which, pretending to be a series of 'papal edicts* 
from Clement and his successors during the ante-Nicene ages, are, in 
fact, the manufactured product of the ninth century, the most stu- 
pendous imposture of the world's history, the most successful and 
the most stubborn in its hold upon enlightened nations. Like the 
mason*s framework of lath and scantlings, on which he turns an 
arch of massive stone, the Decretals served their purpose, enabling 
Nicholas I to found the Papacy by their insignificant aid. That swell- 
ing arch of vanity once reared, the framework might be knocked out ; 
but the fabric stood, and has borne up every weight imposed upon it 
for ages. Its strong abutments have been ignorance and despotism. 
Nicholas produced his flimsy framework of imposture, and amazed the 
whole Church by the audacity of the claims he founded upon it. The 
age, however, was unlearned and uncritical ; and, in spite of remon- 
strances from France under lead of Hincmar, bishop of Rheims, the 
West patiently submitted to the overthrow of the ancient Canons 
and the Nicene Constitutions, and bowed to the yoke of a new canon 
law, of which these frauds were not only made an integral, but the es- 
sential, part. The East never accepted them for a moment. . . . The 
Papacy created the Western schism, and contrived to call it 'the 


schism of the Greeks.' The Decretals had created the Papacy, and 
they enabled the first Pope to assume that communion with himself 
was the test of Catholic communion: hence his excommunication of 
the Easterns, which, after brief intervals of relaxation, settled into the 
chronic schism of the Papacy, and produced the awful history of 
the medieval Church in Western Europe." (ANF. viii, 601.) 


Great and pernicious as were the influences of the forged Isidorian 
Decretals, there yet remained a step to bring the Forger Church to 
the height of its age-old ambitious scheme to completely imitate the 
olden Roman Empire and dominate the world. "The School of Bologna 
had just revived the study of Roman law ; Gratian sought to inaugu- 
rate a similar study of canon law. But while compilations of texts and 
official collections were available for Roman law, or 'Corpus juris 
civilis,' Gratian had no such assistance. He therefore adopted the 
plan of inserting the texts in the body of his general treatise; from 
the disordered mass of canons, collected from the earliest days, he 
selected the law actually in force. . . . The science of canon law was 
at length established." (CE. ix, 57.) But this disordered mass out of 
which Gratian selected was very largely the old forged reliances of the 
Church ; thus in making his selections "Gratian alleges forged decre- 
tals" (CE. iv, 1), including the Constantine Donation, the Isidore 
forgeries, etc. Yet, withal, "the 'Decretum 5 of Gratian was considered 
in the middle of the twelfth century as a corpus juris canonici t i. e. a 
code of ecclesiastic laws then in force." (CE. iv, 671.) It clinched the 
rivets in the forged fetters of the Church upon the neck of Christen- 
dom, and sanctioned the principles which in the next century were in- 
voked to found and justify the Holy Inquisition. Of this celebrated 
document, the beginning of the "science" of Church legistic sophistry, 
Draper says : "The most potent instrument of the new papal system 
was Gratian's Decretum, which was issued about the middle of the 
Twelfth Century. It was a mass of fabrications. It made the whole 
Christian world, through the papacy, the domain of the Italian clergy. 
It inculcated that it is lawful to constrain men to goodness, to torture 
and execute heretics, and to confiscate ihtir property; that to Hll an 



excommunicated person is not murder; that the pope, in his unlimited 
superiority to all law, stands on an equality with the Son of God" 
(Conflict between Science and Religion, ch. x, p. 273.) 


As said by Dr. McCabe : "There was no need of further forgeries. 
Now securely established on its basis of forged donations of temporal 
power and territory, forged decretals stating its spiritual powers, and 
forged lives of saints and martyrs, the papacy was so strong and pros- 
perous that the popes actually dreamed of forming a sort of United 
States of Europe with themselves as virtual presidents. Nearly every 
country was in some ingenious way made out to be a fief of the Papacy 
and bound to recognize the Pope as its feudal monarch. 5 ' (LBB. 1130, 

Founding thus its religion, that newer form of Paganism called 
Christianity, on falsehood and forged "Scripture" documents; its 
pretensions to superiority and "primacy" on gross "interpolations" 
into the forged Scriptures ; its spurious claims to territorial posses- 
sions and temporal sovereignty upon forged title-deeds and Dona- 
tions ; its "spiritual" and legal domination upon forged Church law 
and constitutions, thus was the visible Church of Christ brought to 
the perfection of its power and degradation. For fifteen hundred years 
every document under which it claimed, it forged ; it forged until it had 
no longer need of forgery, for nothing was left to forge ; forged so 
long as it could forge with impunity, for with the Renaissance its old 
forgeries began to be discovered and exposed, and it could commit 
undetected no further documentary forgeries. 

Such is the objective side, as it were, of the Christian religion and 
its Church. Its subjective side, the subjugation of its victims by im- 
posed ignorance and superstition, through limitless forgeries of mira- 
cles, martyrs, saints and relics, remains to be briefly noticed as a sort 
of by-product of the Holy Church Forgery Mill. 


Not to mention the revolt known as the "Reformation," the dis- 
covery of the unholy and criminal practices of the Church in the 


matter of its claims of primacy and jurisdiction, as defined in the 
Isidorian False Decretals, led to one tardy and half-way ecclesiastical 
effort of revolt within the Roman Church, which might have developed 
into something worth while to humanity as a whole, but that "political 
considerations" intervened to bring it to naught. It is cited simply 
by way of historical reminder, and as suggestive of what may yet be 
effectively accomplished to the full extent of popular repudiation. 

The Congress of Ems, in 1786, was a gathering of the representa- 
tives of a number of German Archbishops and other clergy, "for the 
purpose of protesting against papal interference in the exercise of 
episcopal powers and fixing the future relations between these arch- 
bishops and the Roman pontiff. . . . On 25 August, 1786, these 
archiepiscopal representatives signed the notorious Tunctation of 
Ems,' consisting of twenty-three articles, which aimed at making the 
German archbishops practically independent of Rome. Assuming 
that Christ gave unlimited power of binding and loosing to the 
Apostles and their successors, the bishops, the *Punctation 5 main- 
tains that all prerogatives and reservations which were not actually 
connected with the primacy during the first three centuries owe their 
origin to the Pseudo-Isidorian decretals, universally acknowledged as 
false, and, hence, that the bishops must look upon all interference of 
the Roman Curia with the exercise of their episcopal functions in their 
own dioceses as encroachments on their rights. ... It may easily be 
seen that the articles of the *Punctation* lower the papal primacy to a 
merely honorary one and advocate an independence of the arch- 
bishops in regard to the pope which is entirely incompatible with the 
Unity and CathoUcity of the Church of Christ," such are the 
unctuous objections made by Christ's Church. However, the Puncta- 
tions were "ratified by the Archbishops, and sent to Emperor Joseph 
II for his support. The Emperor was pleased with the articles, and 
would have pledged his unqualified support if his councillors had not 
for political reasons advised him otherwise." (CE. v, 409-10.) Re- 
jecting the "assumption," now known to be false and forged, that 
Christ had anything at all to do with Peter and the Rock-and-Keys 
forgery, all may now feel free to discard these primitive "Scripture" 
frauds just as all the others of the Church which have been exposed as 
false and abandoned. 




"Throughout Church History there are miracles so well authenticated 
that their truth cannot be denied," (CE. x, 345.) 

"... after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying 
wonders." (2 Thess. ii, 9.) 

Look we for a moment on this picture and on that, the counterfeit 
presentment, to slightly adapt Hairilet, of two modern Miracles, pub- 
lished to the world in the Metropolitan press, a sort of study in what 
may be called Comparative Credulity. The first, although they "read 
it in the paper," no Christian or no Infidel will hesitate to laugh at or 
commiserate as a ridiculous superstition, taken advantage of by 
greedy priests to exploit their credulous dupes. Only benighted 
heathen Buddhists religiously believe the following: 

"Peasant says Buddha Arose and Cured Him. 

"Chinese Tale of a 'Miracle' by Stone Image Causes Religious 

"Revival at Peking 

"Peking, Sept. 7. A tremendous revival of religious superstition is being 
experienced by the Buddhists of Peking and vicinity, because an aged peas- 
ant vows that he was cured (last week) of a long-standing ailment when one 
of the stone images of the sitting Buddha at Palichwang Pagoda rose to 
its feet, stepped forward, and then raised its arm in sign of benediction. 

"The old peasant, named Chang Chi-kuang, is a farmer, living near 
Palichwang Pagoda [a short distance from the Peking gate of the Great 
Wall]. Chang Chi-kuang, who, his neighbors say, has long suffered from 
lung trouble [passing by with a load of garden-truck which he was carry- 
ing afoot into the city], became exhausted, and stopped for rest and for 
refuge from the heat in the shade of an old tree near the Pagoda, which is 
thirteen stories high and was built 500 years ago, and in the days of the 
Ming emperors. 

"Chang Chi-kuang, as he lay resting in the shade, found his gaze fo- 
cused on the figure of the sitting Buddha, in the third story of the Pagoda. 
. . . The figure rose, Chang says, took two steps, and raised its arms with 
a gesture of blessing. At this point, according to Chang, he nearly swooned. 
He then fell to his knees in devout worship, and when he raised his head 
after a long prayer the Buddha had gone back to the place and position of 
the last few hundred years. 

"The story of this miracle has spread rapidly. Every day now thousands 


of pilgrims go to Palichwang from Peking and from the villages and farms 
in this part of the province. 

"Both sides of the road from the Peking gate to the Pagoda are now 
lined with booths where incense sold, and hundreds of Lama priests, 
with their begging bowls, now reap a rich gathering from the pious pil- 
grims. . . . And old Chang swears that he is now in better health than he 
has enjoyed since he was a boy." (Special Correspondence of the New 
York Times, October 14, 1928.) 

The foregoing religious news item is found archived in the 
"Morgue" of the Great "Religious" Daily under the discrediting 
caption " Supers titions" ; it will be noticed that the word "Miracle" 
in the headline is printed in quotes. No such skeptical note is to be 
found in its next Christian report. 

Hundreds of millions of pious priest-ridden Christians do believe 
the following, testified under oath in a military court, other hun- 
dreds of millions will regard it 'as they do the Buddhist tale above 
related, and the Christian one below : 

"Soldier's Story of a Miracle Saves Him at Court-Martial. 

"Croatian newspapers tell how a miracle figured as a determining factor 
in a court-martial trial. During the Austrian invasion of Upper Italy a 
Croatian soldier was suspected of having stolen a pearl necklace from a 
statue of the Holy Virgin in a pilgrims' chnrch and was brought to trial. 
He admitted having taken the necklace, but insisted that it was a gift to 

"He said that he had gone into the church to pray, and had lamented 
before the statue of the Virgin the sad lot of his family, whom he had been 
compelled to leave destitute. Thereupon, he said, the Holy Virgin bowed 
her head, and took the pearls from her neck and handed them to him. 

"The Court could not venture to reject this story offhand, as there was 
general belief in the miracle-working power of the statue. So it referred 
the matter to two Bishops, asking them whether such a miracle was within 
the domain of possibility. 

"The Bishops were perplexed. If they answered *Yes/ they might be 
protecting a rascal. But if they said 'No,* they would destroy the repute 
of that church for miraculous power and phenomena. Finally they an- 
swered that such a miracle was within the range of possibility; and in con- 
sequence the soldier was acquitted. 

"But the Colonel of the regiment to which the soldier belonged was 
either skeptical or of a most prudent turn of mind, for after the verdict 
of the court had been announced he issued his order: 'In future no soldier 



under my command is permitted, under heavy penalty, to accept a gift 
from anybody/ " (New York Times, Oct. 10, 1926.) 

It is not reported whether this episcopal pair of men of God were 
unfrocked for perjury and the perversion of justice, or even gently 
chided by His Holiness. 

The "lying wonders" of saints, martyrs and miracles are so inti- 
mately related, and so inextricably interwoven the one form of pious 
fraud with the others, that they must needs be bunched together in this 
summary treatment of but few out of countless thousands, millions 
perhaps, of them recorded for faith and edification in the innumerable 
"Acts" and "Lives' 5 and wonderworks of the Holy Church of God. 
Those which are here mentioned are picked at random from a turning 
of the pages of the fifteen ponderous tomes of CE., where they may be 
verified under the respective names of the Saints. With scarcely an ex- 
ception they are soberly recounted as actual verities of the past and 
living realities of the present. 

The degraded state of mind of the Faithful, and the moral de- 
pravity of the Church which for nearly two millennia, and yet into the 
twentieth century, peddles these childish fables as articles of Chris- 
tian faith, may be known by the mere fact of the existence in limitless 
numbers of these precious myths. Founded by Jean Bolland, of Bel- 
gium, in the early years of the 1600's, an important Church Society, 
known as the Bollandists, yet exists and industriously carries on its 
labors. "This monumental work, the Ada Sanctorum of the Bolland- 
ists, has become the foundation of all investigation in hagiography 
and legend." (CE. ix, 129.) For some three centuries its task has been 
and yet is, to edit and publish in official Act a Sanctorum the Lives and 
"Acts" authenticated records of every Saint in the Holy Roman 
Calendar. Arranged in order of dates of their "feast days," so nu- 
merous is this heavenly mill-made host that up to the month of October 
over 25,000 officially authenticated Saints are recorded; the Saint- 
library of the Society has over 150,000 saintly volumes. As it costs 
about $50,000 to turn out one Saint by canonization, and "not less 
than $20,000" for beatification or the bestowal of the title of Blessed 
(CE. ii, 369), the Church revenue from this single source is seen 
to have been considerable. 


Holy Church is very careful and conscientious in its processes of 
certifying Saints ; at least two allegedly genuine and fully authenti- 
cated miracles must be prown to have been performed by the candidate 
alive or worked by his relics after death, before final payment is re- 
quired and the name certified as a Saint to the Calendar. A fairly 
modern instance showing this clerical scrupulosity may be cited, 
that of the Venerable Mary de Sales, who died in 1875 : "Wishing to 
save the world over again, Jesus Our Lord had to use means till 
then unknown," that is, "The Way" invented by Mary ; but no miracles 
were satisfactorily proved to justify making her a Saint; however, 
her sanctity was proved, and she was decreed Venerable ; some miracles 
must later have been proved up in her behalf, or the requisite $20,000 
paid, for in 1897 her Beatification was decreed. (CE. ix, 754.) 

However, even Infallibility may be fooled sometimes, even if not 
all the time. The most notorious instance is that of the holy Saint 
Josaphat, under which name and due to an odd slip of inerrant in- 
spiration, the great Lord Buddha, "The Light of Asia, 5 * was duly 
certified a Saint in the Roman Martyrology (27 Nov. ; CE. iii, 297). 
More modernly, in 1802, an old grave was found containing a cadaver 
and a bottle "supposed to contain the blood of a martyr" ; the relics 
were enshrined in an altar, and the erstwhile owner of the remains was 
duly and solemnly canonized as Saint Philomena; but this was "by 
mistake"; and thus were fooled two infallible Holinesses, Gregory 
XVI and Leo HL (CE. xii, 25.) 


Before thumbing the wonder-filled pages of CE. to pick out from 
thousands, sundry examples of the inspired and truthful histories of 
Saints and Martyrs, recorded for the moral edification and mental 
stultification of the Faithful of the Twentieth Century, when only 
the miracles of Science in benefit of humanity are recognized by many 
as real, we may note the comment of that Exponent of "Catholic 
Truth" conscientiously questioning a case or two of the certified 
Saint-records. With respect to one of the notable female Saints, St. 
Catherine of Alexandria, it is candidly explained: "Unfortunately 
these Acts have been transformed and distorted by fantastic and 
diffuse descriptions which are entirely due to the imagination of the 


narrators [a notable one of whom was the great Bossuet of France], 
who cared less to state authentic f acts than to charm their readers 
by recitals of the marvellous." (CE. iii, 445.) Speaking of another 
case, St. Emmeram: "The improbability of the tale, the fantastic 
details of the Saint's martyrdom, and the fantastic account of the 
prodigies attending his death, show that the writer, infected by the 
pious mania of his time, simply added to the facts imaginary details 
supposed to redound to the glory of the martyr." (v, 406.) How often 
have we heard from this same exponent of "Catholic Truth" this same 
exculpation of priestly pious mendacity in wondermongering ! 

Questioning a few such instances, implicitly carries with it the moral 
assurance that all the others, related as unquestioned fact, are free 
from such taint of fraud, are, indeed, among those "miracles so 
well authenticated that their truth cannot be denied." Indeed, the real- 
ity and authenticity of very many, for example, the bubbling blood of 
the sixteen-hundred-y ear-old martyred St. Januarius, and its frequent 
efficacy in stopping eruptions of the Volcano Mt. Vesuvius, are explic- 
itly affirmed by the Catholic Encyclopedia, which is now to be quoted. 
It may be suspected, however, that even these certified Saint-tales, 
like so many others, are fakes and "belong to the common foundation 
of all legends of saints" (CE. i, 40), the fraud of which is confessed. 

Very portentous is this St. Januarius, "martyred" about 305: 
"His holy blood is kept unto this day in a phial of glass, which being set 
near his head, bubbles up as though it were fresh," in the church of 
St. Januarius at Naples ; a long article is replete with plenary proofs 
of this and other miracles of the Saint. He was thrown into a fiery 
furnace, but the flames would not touch him and his companions ; his 
executioner was struck blind, but the Saint cured him. His holy re- 
mains were brought to Naples, and are famous on account of many 
miracles, as recorded in the official papal "present Roman Martyr- 
ology," a longer account being given in the Breviary, as quoted in 
these words of assurance : "Among these miracles is remarkable the 
stopping of eruptions of Mount Vesuvius, whereby both that neighbor- 
hood and places afar off have been like to be destroyed. It is also well 
known amd is the plain fact 9 seen even unto this day, that when the 
blood of St. Januarius, kept dried up in a small glass phial, is put in 
sight of the head of the same martyr, it is wont to melt and bubble up 


in a very strange way, as though it had but freshly been shed. . . . 
For more than four hundred years this liquefaction has taken place at 
frequent intervals"; elaborate tests, the last reported in 1902 and 
1904, have been unable to account for the phenomenon except as due 
to miracle. "It has had much to do with many conversations to Ca- 
tholicism. Unfortunately, however, allegations have often been made as 
to the favourable verdict expressed by scientific men of note, which 
are not always verifiable. The supposed testimony of the great chem- 
ist, Sir Humphrey Davy, who is declared to have expressed his belief 
in the genuineness of the miracle, is a case in point." (CE. viii, 295-7.) 
This Holy Bottle of blood might well be borrowed to stop the pres- 
ent eruption of Mt. JEtna in Sicily, which (as this is written), is 
destroying several populous towns and "the most intensively culti- 
vated land in Sicily," by a torrent of lava a mile in width, against which 
the local Patron seems impotent : "The lava struck Mascali, a town of 
10,000 inhabitants last night, just after the townsfolk had finished 
celebrating the feast of their patron, St. Leonardo, whose statue was 
carried on the shoulders of four old men." (N. F. Herald-Tribune, 
Nov. 8, 1928.) But such pious thaumaturgies do not seem to be overly 
potent this year. In this unguarded a priori surmise I find myself mis- 
taken, and apologize to the gentle reader and to Holy Church. There 
is no need to borrow the Vesuvius-stopping Blood of St. Januarius ; 
Sicily has its own local JStna-stopper, the Holy Veil of St. Agatha, 
"which, according to tradition, has arrested the flow of lava toward 
Catania in the past." This sacred and potent relic, a bit tardily, after 
several large towns have been wiped out, has now "been exposed in the 
cathedral by order of the Archbishop Cardinal Nava, who also issued 
an appeal for prayers by all in the diocese. He exhorted the popula- 
tion to remain calm and maintain their faith. On previous occasions 
prayers to St. Agatha were said when an eruption occurred, and the 
lava stopped short before Nicolosi and Linguaglossa, twenty-five 
miles north of Catania." (N. Y. Sim, Nov. 13, 1928.) This tardy 
exposition of the Relics and order for prayers, after scientific ex- 
aminations and airplane explorations had shown that the fiery forces 
were about spent and "the lava showing signs of solidification and 
emissions from the smoking mountain lessening, 9 * is somewhat 
posthumous, or humorous ; the devastation was already wrought. If 



St. Agatha's anti-volcano Veil had been gotten out of storage and 
waved or hung up on the first signs of eruption, some of this history, 
one way or another, would have been different. But if the Saint can 
stop volcanoes after the evil deed is done, Well, one miracle of pre- 
vention is better than a larger number of miracles of cure, which 
are ineffective to repair the havoc in such cases. Like miracles of 
liquefaction of Holy Blood yet occur abundantly, as in the noted cases 
of "Saints John the Baptist, Stephen, Pantaleone, Patricia, Nicholas, 
Aloysius," et id omne genus; so with the bottled "Milk of our Lady" 
and the canned "fat of St. Thomas Aquinas," on their respective 
Saint-days! (CE. viii, 297.) 

The sacred Council of Trent, in 1546, decreed: "That the saints 
who reign with Christ offer to God their prayers for men ; that it is 
good and useful to invoke them by supplication and to have recourse 
to their aid and assistance in order to obtain from God His benefits 
through His Son and Our Saviour Jesus Christ, who alone is our 
Saviour and Redeemer." (Session xxv.) But the sacred Council, in its 
preoccupation of combating the nascent outraged revolt and protest 
of Protestantism, which was filching its most plausible counterfeits 
for circulation in a hostile camp, seems to have overlooked this scrap 
of forged Scripture : "For there is one God, and one Mediator between 
God and men, the man Christ Jesus." (I Tim. ii, 5.) The effect, how- 
ever, of this multiplication of saintly mediators is picturesque ; it is 
finely exemplified in the great painting "The Intercession of the 
Saints," in the Royal Gallery at Naples: In the background is the 
plague-stricken city ; in the foreground the people are praying to the 
city authorities to avert the plague ; the city authorities are praying 
to the Carthusian monks ; the monks are praying to the Blessed Vir- 
gin; the Virgin prays to Christ ; and Christ prays to his Father Al- 
mighty. The Holy Ghost, who "itself maketh intercession for us with 
groanings which cannot be uttered," is quite left out of the picture. 
Just how good and useful it is to invoke the Saints directly, saving 
Doctor's bills and other inconveniences, will be noticed in the cata- 
logue of Saints below inscribed. 

It was in the fifth century, says Dr. McCabe, that "Rome began on 
a large scale the forgery of lives of martyrs. Relics of martyrs were 
now being 'discovered 5 in great numbers to meet the pious, demand of 


ignorant Christendom, and legends were fabricated by the thousands 
to authenticate the spurious bits of bone." (LBB. 1130, p. 40.) 
"Such," says CE. 9 "are the 'Martyrium S. Polycarpi,' admitting, 
though it does, much that may be due to the pious fancy of the eye- 
witness" ; also "the 'Acta SS. Perpetuae et Felicitas.' " 

The Saint-mill of Holy Church began operations very early, or 
reached for grist far back into antiquity for the beginnings of its 
Calendar of Saints. The first Saint who greets us among the countless 
hordes of canonized Holy Ones is no less a primitive personage that St. 
Abel, the younger son and second heir of our mythical Father Adam, 
of Eden, who was canonized by Jesus Christ himself, we are told, "as 
the first of a long line of prophets martyred for justice's sake," as is 
the clerical interpretation of Matt, xxiii, 34-35, "That upon you may 
come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of 
Abel unto the blood of Zacharias," a bloody invocation in later cen- 
turies peculiarly appropriate to the Church of Jesus Christ. This is 
a genuine surprise, for no miracles wrought by St. Abel are recorded, 
and no generous canonization fees seem to have been paid for his 
account into the Treasury of the Lord in Rome. 


Many of the Pagan gods were converted into Christian Saints, and 
seem to have brought over 'with them the special curative or prophy- 
lactic attributes for which they were invoked as specifics. Indeed, the 
whole system was purely Pagan: "Cures, apparitions, prophecies, 
visions, transfigurations, stigmata, pleasant odour, incorruption, 
all these phenomena were also known to antiquity. Ancient Greece 
exhibits stone monuments and inscriptions which bear witness to cures 
and apparitions in ancient mythology. History tells of Aristeas of 
Proconnessus, Hermotimus of Claxomenae, Epimenides of Crete, that 
they were ascetics and thereby became ecstatic, even to the degree of 
the soul leaving the body, remaining far removed from it, and being 
able to appear in other places." (CE. ix, 129.) The pious plan of 
temporal salvation in the Ages of Faith is thus historically vouched: 
"The whole social life of the Catholic world before the Reformation 
was animated with the idea of protection from the citizens of heaven. 



There were patrons or protectors in various forms of illness, as for 
instance : St. Agatha, diseases of the breast ; Apollonia, toothache ; 
Blaise, sore throat ; Clare and Lucy, eyes ; Benedict, against poison ; 
Hubert, against bites of dogs." (CE. xi, 566.) "Catania honours St. 
Agatha as her patron saint, and throughout the region around Mt. 
./Etna she is invoked against the eruptions of the volcano, as elsewhere 
against fire and lightning." (i, 204*.) 

To the infamous sanctified fable of St. Hugh are imputed sundry 
unholy accusations and persecutions against the Jews, (here only 
repeated because they are falsely affirmed in the inspired Bull of 
Canonization. A Christian child was lyingly alleged to have been 
crucified by the Jews ; the earth refused to receive its body, and it was 
thrown into a well, where it was found with the marks of crucifixion 
upon it ; nineteen Jews were infamously put to death for the fabulous 
crime, and ninety others were condemned to death but released, for the 
sake of greed, upon payment of large fines ; "Copin, the leader, stated 
that it was a Jewish custom to crucify a boy once a year" ! (CE. vii, 
515) ; similar infamies of falsehood are related in connection with St. 
William of Norwich. (CE. xv, 635.) 

Here is a monumental miracle with every assurance of verity, "St. 
Winefride was a maiden of great personal charm and endowed with 
rare gifts of intellect. The fame of her beauty and accomplishments 
reached the ears of Caradoc, son of the neighboring Prince Alen." She 
refused all his advances ; frightened by his threats she fled towards the 
church where her uncle St. Beuno was celebrating Mass. "Maddened 
by a disappointed passion, Caradoc pursued her and, overtaking her 
on the slope above the site of the present well, he drew his sword and 
at one blow severed her head from the body. The head rolled down the 
incline and, where it rested, there gushed forth a spring." St. Beuno, 
hearing of the tragedy, left the altar, and accompanied by the par- 
ents came to the spot where the head lay beside the spring. "Taking up 
the maiden's head he carried it to where the body lay, covered both 
with his cloak, and then re-entered the church to finish the Holy 
Sacrifice. When Mass was ended he knelt beside the Saint's body, 
offered up a fervent prayer to God, and ordered the cloak which 
covered it to be removed. Thereupon Winefride, as if awakening from 
a deep slumber, rose up with no sign of the severing of the head except 


a thin white circle round her neck. Seeing the murderer leaning on his 
sword with an insolent and defiant air, St. Beuno invoked the chastise- 
ment of heaven, and Caradoc fell dead on the spot, the popular belief 
being that the earth opened and swallowed him. Miraculously restored 
to life, Winef ride seems to have lived in almost perpetual ecstacy and 
to have had familiar converse with God." The place where this signal 
miracle occurred was at the time called "Dry Hollow," but with its 
miraculous spring its name was changed to Holywell, and it stands 
there in Wales to this day, a bubblingly vocal witness to the verity of 
this holy yarn. Born in 600, beheaded and reheaded at sweet sixteen, 
she died Nov. 3, 660 ; "her death was foreshown to her in a vision by 
Christ Himself." (CE. xv, 656-657.) "For more than a thousand years 
this Miraculous Well has attracted numerous pilgrims ; documents 
preserved in the British Museum give us its history, with the earliest 
record of the miraculous cures effected by its waters. These ancient 
cures included cases of dropsy, paralysis, gout, melancholia, sciatica, 
cancer, alienation of mind, blood spitting, etc. etc., also deliverance 
from evil spirits." (CE. repeats the history of St. Winefride, or 
Gwenfrewi, in vii, 438.) 

St. Wolfgang, by a unique miracle, "forced the devil to help him 
build a church." Et id omne gemw ad nauseam. Such is a handful 
of the holy chaff of faith, purveyed by Holy Church to all Believers 
to this day. Scores of like saint-lies are here omitted to save space. 

These gross and degrading impostures by forged miracles not only 
went unrebuked and unchecked by the Vicars of God ; many of the 
vice-Gods were among the most prolific miracle-mongers of the ages 
of Faith. One of the most notorious wonder-workers and wonder- 
forgers of Holy Church was no less a personage than His Holiness 
Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604). He has the doubtful distinc- 
tion of being the author of four celebrated volumes of Dialogi, which 
are a veritable thesaurus of holy wonders. From this treasury of 
nature-f akery we have seen the old Pagan example, affirmed as Chris- 
tian fact by Gregory, as quoted by CE. 9 of the man carried off by mis- 
take by the Angel of Death, but restored to life when the oversight 
was discovered. He also relates a great flood of the Tiber which threat- 
ened to destroy Rome, until a copy of His Holiness's "Dialogi" was 



thrown into the swollen waters, which immediately subsided, and the 
Holy City was thus saved. His Holiness solemnly records the case of 
an awful bellyache suffered by a holy nun, which he avers was caused 
bv her having swallowed a devil along with a piece of lettuce which 
she was eating without having taken the due precaution of making 
the sign of the cross over it to scare away any lurking imps of Satan ; 
and this devil, when commanded by a holy monk to come out of the 
nun, derisively replied: "How am I to blame? I was sitting on the 
lettuce, and this woman, not having made the sign of the cross, ate 
me along with it!" (Dial lib. i, c. 4.) When elected Pope in 590 
the city of Rome was afflicted by a dreadful pestilence; the angels 
of the angry God of all mercies were relentlessly flinging fiery darts 
among the devout Christian populace. To conjure away the pestilence 
due perhaps primarily to the filth of the Holy City and its inhab- 
itants His Holiness headed a monkish parade through the stricken 
city, when of a sudden he saw the Archangel Michael hovering over 
the great Pagan mausoleum of Hadrian, just in the act of sheathing 
his flaming sword, while three angels with him chanted the original 
verses of the Regina Coeli; the great Pope made the Sign of the Cross 
and broke into Hallelujahs (that is, "Praise to Yahveh," the old 
Hebrew war-god). In commemoration of the wondrous event, the 
pious Pope built a Christian chapel, dedicated to St. Michael, atop 
the Pagan monument, and over it erected the colossal statue of the 
Archangel in the sword-sheathing act, which stands there in Rome 
to this day the Castel Sant' Angelo, in enduring proof of the miracle 
and of the veracity of papal narratives. (CE. vi, 782.) The author- 
ship of this monkish Hymn to the Queen of Heaven being unknown, 
pious invention supplied its true history : "that St. Gregory the Great 
heard the first three lines chanted by angels on a certain Easter 
morning in Rome while he walked barefoot in a great religious pro- 
cession, and that the Saint thereupon added the fourth line." (CE. 
xii, 719.) Such is ecclesiastical "history. 55 

The literary attainments of His Holiness Gregory were tempered, 
if not corrupted, by his holy zeal, for "in his commentary on Job, 
Gregory I warns the reader that he need not be surprised to find mis- 
takes of Latin Grammar, since in dealing with so holy a work as the 
Bible a writer should not stop to make sure whether his cases and 


tenses are right." (Robinson, The Ordeal of Civilization, p. 62.) 
However, his zeal for more material things was not thus hampered : 
"Pope Gregory I contrived to make his real belief in the approaching 
end of the world yield the papacy about 1800 square miles of land and 
a revenue of about $2,000,000. He used bribes, threats and all kinds of 
stratagems to attain his ends." (McCabe, LLB. 1130, p. 40.) 

His Holiness Gregory I was himself one of the greatest thaumatur- 
gists of the Ages of Faith : "the miracles attributed to Gregory are 
very many." (CE. vi, 786.) When Mohammed was forging his in- 
spired Book of Koran, the illuminating spirit, in the guise of a dove, 
would perch on his shoulder and whisper the divine revelations into 
his ear, a miracle which none but quite devout Mohammedans be- 
lieve. But Peter the Deacon, in his Vita of His wonder-working Holi- 
ness, records that when St. Gregory was dictating his Homilies on 
EzeJciel: "A veil was drawn between his secretary and himself. As, 
however, the pope remained silent for long periods at a time, the 
servant made a hole in the curtain and, looking through, beheld a 
dove seated on Gregory's head with his beak between his lips. When 
the dove withdrew its beak the holy pontiff spoke and the secretary 
took down his words ; but when he became silent the secretary again 
applied his eye to the hole and saw that the dove had replaced its beak 
between his lips." (CE. vi, 786.) No good Christian can doubt, after 
this proof, that their Holinesses are constantly and directly inspired 
and guided by the Holy Ghost, as Holy Church assures. Wonderful 
as this bit of Gregory's history is, to recommend him to lasting re- 
membrance, "his great claim to remembrance lies in the fact that he 
is the real father of the medieval papacy." (Ibid.) These qualities of 
the Holy Father which we have noticed may to an extent explain 
some of the eccentricities of the Medieval Papacy. 


"Making every allowance for the errors of the most extreme f allibility, 
the history of Catholicism would on this hypothesis represent an amount 
of imposture probably unequalled in the annals of the human race." 
Lecky, History of Rationalism, i, 164. 

As loathsome an example as is to be found in the annals of Chris- 



tian apologetics for fraud and imposture is this from CE., following 
a long and revolting exposition of the Christian frauds with respect 
to holy Relics of the Church : 

"Still, it would be presumptuous in such cases to blame the action of the 
ecclesiastical authority in permitting the continuance of a cult which ex- 
tends back into remote antiquity, [i. e. into Paganism.] . . . 

"Supposing the relic to be spurious, NO DISHONOR IS DONE TO 
GOD by the continuance of an error handed down in perfect good faith 
for many centuries" ! (CE. xii, 337.) 

It may well be that the holy God of the Christians is immune to 
dishonor by worship through lying Christian frauds ; but one may 
question the dishonor to the human mind wrought by the impostures 
of God's Vicars and his Church, cozening men into holy faith in lies ; 
to say nothing of the shaming dishonor of Church and priest, who 
with utter want of good faith and common honesty created and fos- 
tered all these degrading Churchly cheats. 

Before viewing some of these priestly impostures, never once re- 
buked or prevented by pope or priest, but, rather, industriously stim- 
ulated by them for purposes of perpetuating ignorance and supersti- 
tion, and of feeding their own insatiate avarice, CE. will be invoked 
to give a graphic, though clerically casuistic and apologetic review 
of the debauchery of morals and mind which made possible these scan- 
dalous unholy practices of Holy Church. 

"Naturally it was impossible for popular enthusiasm to be roused 
to so high a pitch in a matter which easily lent itself to error, fraud, 
and greed for gain, without at least the occasional occurrence of manyj 
grave abuses. ... In the Theodosian Code the sale of relics is for- 
bidden (vii, is, 17), but numerous stories, of which it would be easy to 
collect a long series, beginning with the writings of Pope St. Gregory 
the Great and St. Gregory of Tours, prove to us that many unprinci- 
pled persons found a means of enriching themselves by a sort of trade 
in these objects of devotion, the majority of which no doubt were 
fraudulent. At the beginning of the ninth century the exportation 
of the bodies of martyrs from Rome had assumed the proportions of a 
regular commerce, and a certain deacon, Deusdona, acquired an un- 
enviable notoriety in these transactions. What was in the long run 


hardly less disastrous than fraud or avarice, was the keen rivalry be- 
tween religious centers, and the eager credulity fostered by the de- 
sire to be known as the possessor of some unusually startling relic. 
In such an atmosphere of lawlessness doubtful relics came to abound. 
There was always disposition to regard any human remains acciden- 
tally discovered near a church or in the catacombs as the body of a 
martyr . . . the custom of making facsimiles and imitations, a cus- 
tom which persists to our own day in the replicas of the Vatican statue 
of St. Peter [itself a fraud] or of the Grotto of Lourdes all these 
are causes adequate to account for the multitude of unquestionably 
spurious relics with which the treasuries of great medieval churches 
were crowded. . . . Join to this the large license given to the occa- 
sional unscrupulous rogue IN AN AGE NOT ONLY UTTERLY 
UNCRITICAL but often curiously morbid in its realism, and it be- 
comes easy to understand the multiplicity and extravagance of the 
entries in the relics inventories of Rome and other countries. 

"Such tests [to secure the Faithful against deception] were ap- 
plied as the historical and antiquarian science of that day were ca- 
pable of devising. Very often, however, this test took the form of 
an appeal to some miraculous sanction, as in the well known story 
repeated by St. Ambrose, according to which, when doubt arose which 
of the three crosses discovered by St. Helena was that of Christ, the 
healing of a sick man by one of them dispelled all further hesitation. 
Nevertheless it remains true that many of the more important an- 
cient relics duly exMbited for veneration in the great sanctuaries of 
Christendom or even at Rome itself must now be pronounced to be 
either certainly spurious or open to grave suspicion. To take one 
example of the latter class, the boards of the crib (Praessepe) 
a name which for more than a thousand years has been associated, as 
now, with the basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore can only be con- 
sidered to be of doubtful authenticity. * . . Strangely enough, an in- 
scription in Greek uncials of the eighth century is found on one of the 
boards, the inscription having nothing to do with the Crib but being 
apparently concerned with some commercial transaction. It is hard 
to explain its presence on the supposition that the relic is authentic. 
Similar difficulties might be urged against the supposed 'Column of the 
Flagellation* venerated at Rome in the church of Santa Prassede, 



and against many other famous relics. . . . Neither has the church 
ever pronounced that any particular relic, not even that commonly 
venerated as the wood of the Cross, is authentic ; but she approves 
of honour being paid to those relics which with reasonable probabil- 
ity are believed to be genuine, and which are invested with due eccle- 
siastical sanctions." (CE. xii, 737.) Such sophistry! 

The pettifogging sophistry of the foregoing argumentation, as of 
that which follows from the same clerical source, needs no comment. 
The Church of God, headed by his own Vicar General on earth, divinely 
guided against all error in matters of faith and morals, and which 
can detect the faintest taint of heresy of belief further than the most 
gifted bird of rapine can scent a carcass, can make no apology for per- 
mitting these degrading superstitions, which it not only tolerates but 
actively propagates and encourages, for the rich revenues they bring 
in. What a catalogue of its most sacred mummeries is branded with 
the infamy of fraudulent in the following : 

"The worship of imaginary saints or relics, devotion based upon 
false revelations, apparitions, supposed miracles, or false notions 
generally, is usually excusable in the Worshipper on the groiwd of 
ignorance and good faith ; but there is no excuse for those who use 
similar means to exploit popular credulity for their own pecuniary 
profit. The originators of such falsehoods are liars, deceivers, and 
not rarely thieves ; but a milder judgment should be pronounced on 
those who, after discovering the imposture tolerate the improper 
cultus [!] The Catholic devotions which are connected with 
holy places, holy shrines, holy wells, famous relics, etc., are commonly 
treated as superstitions by non-Catholics. ... It must be admitted 
that these hallowed spots and things have occasioned many legends ; 
that popular credulity was in some cases the principal cause of their 
celebrity ; that here or there instances of fraud can be adduced; yet, 
for all that, the principles which guide the worshipper, and his good 
intentions, are not impaired by an undercurrent of error as to facts, 
[ ! ] Moreover . . . the Church is tolerant of * pious beliefs 9 which 
have helped to further Christianity [ ! ] Thus, alleged saints and relics 
are suppressed as soon as discovered, but belief in the private revela- 
tions to which the feast of Corpus Christi, The Rosary, the Sacred 
Heart, and many other devotions owe their origin is neither com- 


manded nor prohibited ; here each man is his own judge. . . . The ap- 
parent success which so often attends a superstition can mostly be ac- 
counted for by natural causes. . . . When the object is to ascertain, 
or to effect in a general way, one of two possible events, the law of 
probabilities gives an equal chance to success and failure, and success 
does more to support than failure would do to destroy superstition." 
(CE. xiv, 340, 341.) All these holy cults are thus confessed frauds and 
superstitions fostered by ecclesiastic greed. 

Let us remember that no True Church in Christendom can be built 
and consecrated without a box of dead man's bones or other fetid 
human scraps and relics deposited under the holy altar of God. The 
decree of the second council of Nice, A. D. 787, reaffirmed by the Coun- 
cil of Trent in 1546, forbade the consecration of any Church without a 
supply of relics. (CE. xii, 737.) Thus the ancient superstition is sanc- 
tioned and its observance made mandatory ; an unceasing demand is 
created, and the market supply is more than equal to the pious de- 
mand. Hence the great and valuable, and fraudulent, traffic above 
confessed and clerically palliated. 


"The Legend as to the discovering of the Cross of Christ" (CE*, 
vii, 203), The Holy City, Jerusalem, was twice destroyed by the 
Romans, in 70 A. D. by Titus, and again as the result of the rebellion 
of Bar-Cochba, 132-135 A. D. The work was peculiarly thorough; 
not one stone was left upon another; the site was plowed over as a 
mark of infamy, and the ground is said to have been sown with salt 
so that nothing might ever grow there again: though pious myths 
soon flourished exuberantly. Later a pagan city was established on 
the site, named JElia Capitolina, and a great Temple of Venus was 
erected on a suitable spot. Over two centuries later, about 326 A. x>., 
a great and venerated Catholic lady Saint made a pious pilgrimage to 
the Holy City, namely, St. Helena, sainted mother of the new "Chris- 
tian" Emperor Constantine. This is the St. Helena who got her start 
as a Pagan barmaid in a wild country village; she fell into the 
graces of the Roman Imperator Constantius as he marched through 
the country, became his mistress by "concubinatus," and bore unto 



him and the Church him who was afterwards the godly Emperor Con- 
stantine. (CE. iv, 300.) Upon the pilgrimage of the pious Dowager- 
mother to Jerusalem, great pomp and ceremony attended her visit, 
under the auspices of the good Bishop Macarius. By order of the 
Bishop and in honor of the Christian Saint, the Temple of Venus was 
torn down ; it was found to have been built over an empty rock grave 
therefore identically the authentic sepulchre of Jesus Christ. Is it 
true, that this destroyed Temple of Venus and the inclosed Holy 
Sepulchre were inside the walls of the City, while the Gospels in- 
spiredly aver that the grave was outside the walls : a trifling discrep- 
ancy for Faith. 

Rummaging the ruins, a vaulted underground room or cellar was 
found: its wonderful contents make to pale into triviality the lately 
discovered tomb-treasures of Tut-ankh-Amen, There propped against 
the cellar-wall was the whole apparatus of the Cruci-fiction : the three 
identical Crosses whereon had hung the Christ and the two thieves ; 
the very Nails wherewith they had been fastened ; the autograph tri- 
lingual Inscription set by Pilate over the head of the Christ ; the pre- 
cise Spear which had pierced his side; the cruel Crown of Thorns 
which tore his brow ; the holy Seamless Coat which he had worn and 
for which the Roman soldiers gambled in the hour of death (it's curious 
that the winner should have left it behind) ; the sacred Shroud in 
which the dead God was buried. The Pilatic Inscription was not in 
situ; it had evidently been knocked off and lay apart, a "separate piece 
of wood, on which were inscribed in white letters in Hebrew, Greek 
and Latin, the following words : ' Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the 
Jews/ ** as recorded by Sozomen, the Church historian. (Eccles. Hist. 
ii, 1 ; N&PNF. II, p. 258.) 

Due to its unfortunate separation from its original position, it was 
for the moment impossible to distinguish the True Cross of Christ 
from those of the thieves. A miracle was vouchsafed, however, to iden- 
tify the real Cross of the Christ: the True Cross bowed itself down 
before the Saintly Empress ; or, a sick woman or a sick man was 
cured upon touching the True Cross after having tried the other two 
in vain according to which priestly version is the more truthful, 
Sozomen (supra) says that it was "a certain lady of rank in Jeru- 
salem who was inflicted with a most grievous and incurable disease," 


whose miraculous curing attested the True Cross ; "a dead person was 
also restored to life" by its thaumaturgic touch : "all as predicted 
by the prophets and by the Sibyl." Some tinge of dubiety may be 
thrown upon the report of Bishop Macarius, who made the wondrous 
discoveries, first recorded by the Church historians Socrates, about 
439 A. D. (Eccles. Hist. I, xvii), and Sozomen, who wrote a little later 
(Eccles. Hist. II, i), by the fact that the earliest Church Historian, 
the very informative and fabling Bishop Eusebius (d. 340) , in his Life 
of Const antine (III, iii, and III, xxviii), gives a very circumstantial 
account of the visit of the ex-Empress St. Helena to Jerusalem, and 
of the erection of a Christian Church over the Holy Sepulchre, but 
he is silent as the grave about the discovery of any Cross of Christ or 
any of the other holy marvels. The notable event is known, in Church 
parlance, as "The Invention of the Cross" which exactly it was. 

The subsequent "history" of the Cross of Christ is a tangle of typi- 
cally clerical contradictions and impossibilities. "Very soon after the 
discovery of the True Cross, its wood was cut up into small relics and 
scattered throughout Christendom." (CE. iv, 524.) 

"We learn from St. Cyril of Jerusalem (before 350) that the wood 
of the Cross, discovered about 318, [it was in 326] was already dis- 
tributed throughout the world." (CE. xii, 736.) But these assurances 
of St. Cyril and of CE. seem out of harmony with the accredited his- 
tory of the capture and asportation of the reputed integral True 
Cross by Chosroes (Khosru) II, King of Persia, who took Jerusalem 
in 614, massacring 90,000 good Christians, captured the Cross of 
Christ among his booty, and carried it off whole in triumph to Persia ! 
(CE. iii, 105), with results very disastrous to the Faith : "The shock 
which religious men received through this dreadful event can hardly 
now be realized. The imposture of Constantine bore bitter fruit ; the 
sacred wood which had filled the world with its miracles was detected to 
be a helpless counterfeit, borne off in triumph by deriding blasphemers. 
All confidence in the apostolic powers of the Asiatic bishops was lost ; 
not one of them could work a wonder for his own salvation in the dire 
extremity." (Draper, The Intellectual Development of Europe, i, 328 ; 
Gibbon, p. 451.) The truly miraculous nature of this True Cross is 
thus described by Draper : "The wood of the Cross displayed a prop- 
erty of growth, and hence furnished an abundant supply for the de- 



mands of pilgrims and an unfailing source of pecuniary profit to its 
possessors. In the course of subsequent years there was accumulated 
in the various churches of Europe, from this particular relic, a suf- 
ficiency to have constructed many hundred crosses." (Op. cit. i, 309.) 
On a great porphyry column before the Church of St. Sophia at Con- 
stantinople, stood a statue of the Pagan god Apollo ; the face was 
altered into the features of the Emperor Constantine, and the Nails 
of the True Cross, set around like rays, were used to garnish the crown 
upon his head. Another of these holy Nails has for centuries- adorned 
and consecreated the crown of the emperors of the Holy Roman Em- 
pire. The horses of a regiment of cavalry could probably be shod with 
the copious supply of these Holy Nails now venerated as sacred relics. 
"It is remarkable," says CE. 9 "that St. Jerome, who expatiates 
upon the Cross, the Title, and the Nails, discovered by St. Helena, 
says nothing either of the Lance or of the Crown of Thorns, and the 
silence of Andreas of Crete in the eighth century is still more surpris- 
ing." But in due time this oversight was piously repaired. Bishop 
Gregory of Tours, among other faithful Church chroniclers, produces 
the Crown of Thorns, and, as an eyewitness to it, "avers that the 
thorns in the Crown still looked green, a freshness which was miracu- 
lously renewed every day"; which episcopal assurance, skeptically 
remarks CE., "does not much strengthen the historical testimony for 
the authenticity of the relic." But, "in any case, Justinian, who died 
in 565, is stated to have given a thorn to St. Germanus, which was long 
preserved at Saint-Germain-des-Pres, while the Empress Irene sent 
Charlemagne several thorns which were deposited by him at Aachen. 
... In 1238 Baldwin II, the Latin Emperor of Constantinople, 
anxious to obtain support for his tottering empire, offered the Crown 
of Thorns to St. Louis, King of France. It was then actually [in 
pawn] in the hands of the Venetians as security for a heavy loan, but 
it was redeemed and conveyed to Paris, where St. Louis built the Sainte 
Chapelle for its reception." The further history of the holy spurious 
relic is traced in detail ; as late as 1896 "a magnificent new reliquary 
of rock crystal was made for it" ; but by that time the holy relic, like 
a fighting-cock with his tail-feathers clawed out, was a sorry sight : 
"The Crown, thus preserved, consists only of a circlet of rushes, with- 
out any trace of thorns." A ray of light on Church fakery is thrown 


by the closing comment : "That all the reputed holy thorns of which 
notice has survived cannot by any possibility be authentic will be dis- 
puted by no one; more than 700 such relics have been enumerated 5 *! 
(CE. iv, 540, 54*1.) 

As for the Holy Lance, which pierced the side of the dying God, 
also resurrected by pious diligence of "invention," its devious and 
dubious history is thus traced by our modern ecclesiastical mummery- 
monger: "A spear believed to be identical with that which pierced 
our Saviour's body, was venerated at Jerusalem at the close of the 
sixth century. The sacred relics of the Passion fell into the hands of 
the pagans. Many centuries afterwards (i. e. in 1241), the point of 
the Lance was presented by Baldwin to St. Louis, and it was en- 
shrined with the Crown of Thorns in the Sainte Chapelle. Another 
part of the Lance is preserved under the dome of St. Peter's in Rome. 
. . . Rival lances are known to be preserved at Nuremberg, Paris, 
etc. Another lance claiming to be that which produced the wound in 
Christ's side is now preserved among the imperial insignia at Vienna ; 
another is preserved at Cracow, Legend assigns the name of Longinus 
to the soldier who thrust the Lance into our Saviour's side ; according 
to the same tradition, he was healed of ophthalmia and converted by 
a drop of the precious blood spurting from the wound." (viii, 7734.) 

There was also timely discovered, by some notable chance or miracle, 
the very stairway, "consisting of twenty-eight white marble steps, 
. . . the stairway leading once to the Prastorium of Pilate, hence 
sanctified by the footsteps of Our Lord during his Passion," as we are 
assured by CE. (viii, 505.) This famous relic, the "Holy Stairs," 
which somehow escaped the two destructions of Jerusalem and the 
ravages of time for nearly three centuries, was "brought from Jeru- 
salem to Rome about 326 by St. Helena, mother of Constantine the 
Great. . . . It is now before the Sancta Sanctorum (Holy of Holies) 
of the Lateran Palace. The Sancta Sanctorum receiving its name from 
the many precious relics preserved there, also contains the celebrated 
image of Christ, 'not made with hands, 5 which on certain occasions 
used to be carried through Rome in procession. . . . The Holy Stairs 
may only be -ascended on the knees. , , . Finally Pius X, on 26 Feb- 
ruary, 1908, granted a plenary indulgence \i. e. a permanent escape 
from Purgatory] to be gained as often as the Stairs are devoutedly 



ascended after confession and communion/' (CE. viii, 505.) It is 
related that Father Luther was performing this holy penitential climb 
of the "Scala Sancta," when suddenly the vast sham and fraud of his 
religion burst upon his consciousness : the Reformation was a conse- 
quence. In passing this famous "Mother of Churches/* St. John 
Lateran, we may admire the wonderful portrait of Jesus Christ which 
adorns its sacred walls ; the painting of it was begun by Dr. St. Luke 
himself, but being left incomplete, it was finished by an angel. 


Think not that these ancient frauds of the Church have been dis- 
carded in shame by the Church now that their fraudulent origin and 
purpose are exposed to public obloquy and ridicule. In full blaze of 
world attention and publicity of the Twentieth Century, God's own 
Vicar vouches before the world for these tawdry impostures, brought 
forth before the world to lend climax of superstitious solemnity to his 
crazy Crusade of prayer and incited pious hatred against the brave 
efforts of the Russians to undo the fell work of the Church in that un- 
happy land. Associated Press dispatches from Vatican City announce : 
"To lend emphasis to the protest here, celebrated relics kept at St. 
Peter's a portion of the true cross ; St, Veronica's Veil, with which 
Christ is said to have wiped His face on His way to Calvary, and the 
centurion's lance which pierced His Side will be displayed." (N. Y. 
Herald-Tribune, March 19, 1930.) "After the ceremony those present 
will receive benediction with the sacred relics." (N. Y. Sun, Mch. 13, 
1930.) Nearby, "the stones of the pavement on which the Apostles 
[Peter and Paul] knelt in prayer and which are said to contain the 
impression of their knees, are now in the wall of the Church of Santa 
Francesca Romana." (CE. xiii, 797.) Such lying vouchers are fit 
setting for the crusade of unholy lies and hate against a people which 
for centuries has been kept in grossest ignorance and superstition by 
greedy priestcraft, now repudiated by its victims. 

The foregoing solemn vouching for antique fakeries provoked a 
deal of skeptical ridicule throughout the world, even among some of 
the Faithful : so it must needs be emphasized by repetition, with some 
notable other Fake Relics added for "assurance doubly sure." So, 


when the Pagan Festival of Easter dawned on the Pagan "Day of the 
Venerable Sun/ 9 His Royal-Holiness came forth in the full splendor 
of the Pagan Pontifex Maximus to celebrate the Event, and by his 
Infallible presence to vouch again for the genuineness of these holy 
spurious Relics. Probably he wore and ostentated in the joy of its 
recovery, the celebrated "so-called Episcopal Ring of St. Peter, rich 
with sapphires and diamonds," stolen from the Vatican treasury in 
1925, and recently recaptured with the thief. (Herald-Tribune^ Dec. 
3, 1929.) It is possible that he sat in state in the very Throne or "Chair 
of St. Peter," which the Fisherman Pope used, as dubiously vouched 
by CE. under that caption. In any event, whatever throne he used was 
planted immediately above the grave where lies the headless cadaver of 
St. Peter himself, for "the skulls of Sts. Peter and Paul" were later 
viewed at the Lateran, and there "shown for the adoration of the 
Faithful. 35 As announced in several Press dispatches, an inventory of 
the holy Relics and ceremonials is here recorded. In preparation for 
the Sacred Event in the Twentieth Century : "The major basilicas will 
all have on display their most precious relics. . . . The purported 
Cradle of Bethlehem [made out of an eighth century packing case] 
will be brought forth. Those attending mass at the Lateran will be 
able to view the skulls of Sts. Peter and Paul, and a bit of what is 
"believed [by whom, not stated] to be the True Cross [carried off 
entire in 614 by the Persians]; . . , the reputed Lance of the Roman 
centurion who speared the side of Christ, and the 'Holy Veil* or napkin 
offered to Christ by St. Veronica," who is a myth forged from "vera 
icon." (A .P. dispatch, Apl. 19, 1930.) Also : "A fragment of the Cross 
and two Thorns from the crown of the Saviour. . . . The Sancta 
Scala (Holy Stairs), . . . drew the usual Good Friday throngs of 
the Faithful today. . . . Processions were held inside the ancient edi- 
fices to honor the relics, [including] what, according to tradition, are 
the heads of the apostles St. Peter and St. Paul . . . shown for the 
adoration of the Faithful." (Herald-Tribune, Apl. 19, 1930.) Then 
came the consummation and solemn Infallible accrediting of these 
"most precious relics" . "Pope Celebrates Easter Mass. . . . Relics 
of the Passion [surrounded him], a reputed fragment of the Cross, a 
piece of the Spear which pierced [reputedly] the side of the Saviour, 
and the Veil of St. Veronica, . . . were displayed from the balcony 



above the Papal Altar." (Ibid, Apl. 21, 1930.) Now at last, in 
Twentieth Century, "Roma locuta est causa finita est" and these 
originally bogus frauds are genuine and authentic Relics for the 
Faithful who may believe it. 

Samples of the "seed of the Serpent" of Eden, the scales that fell 
from the eyes of {Elijah's servant, the original wicked flea, the two 
dwarf mummies of Bildad the Shu-hite and Ne-hi-miah, the 200 Phi- 
listine trophies brought in by David as his marriage dot (1 Sam. xviii, 
25-27), the horn of salvation, and the instruments of Cornelius's Ital- 
ian Band, are about the only honest-to-goodness authentic Biblical 
relics which seem not to be preserved among the countless holy fake 
treasures of Holy Church. The famous juvenile pocket-inventories 
of Tom Sawyer and Huckelberry Finn, and the monstrous f akeries of 
the late lamented Phineas Barnum, are paltry trivialities beside the 
countless and priceless Relic-treasures of Holy Church, religiously 
guarded for "veneration" by True Believers blessed by the privilege 
of paying "the more you pay the more you merit" is the maxim 
to gaze in rapt awe at, and to kiss and fondle, these ghastly and 
ghoulish, false and forged, bloody scraps and baubles of perverted 
piosity. The foreskin of the Child Christ miraculously preserved exists 
to this day; enough of his diapers and swaddling-cloths, as of the 
sanitary draperies of his Ever- Virgin Mother, are of record to stock 
a modern department store. During the era of the unholy Crusades the 
soldiers of Christ brought from the Holy Land countless numbers of 
duly certified bottles of the Milk of the Virgin Mother of God, and 
drove a thrifty business selling them to churches and superstitious 
dupes through Europe. 

Yet in existence are several portraits of the Mother of God, "said 
to have been painted by St. Luke ; they belong to the sixth century." 
(CjEJ. xv, 471.) "There is still preserved at Messina a letter attributed 
to the Blessed Virgin, which, it is claimed, was written by her to the 
Messenians when Our Lady heard of their conversion by St. Paul." 
(x, 217 ; cf . list of several : i, 613.) "The Shroud of the Blessed Virgin 
is preserved in the Church of Gethsemane." (xiv, 775.) The Holy 
Winding Sheet or shroud of the Christ was formerly "exposed for 
veneration" at Troyes ; but the Bishop "declared after due inquiry 
that the relic was nothing but a painting and opposed its exposition. 


Clement VI, by four Bulls (1390), approved the exposition as lawful." 
After being stolen and hawked about, this sacred relic "is now ex- 
posed and honoured at Turin." (xv, 67-68.) There must be something 
wrong about this, for "The Diocese of Perigueux has a remarkable 
relic : The Holy Shroud of Christ, brought back after the first cru- 
sade. An official investigation in 1444? asserted the authenticity of the 
relic." (xi, 668.) The Minster treasury of the Cathedral of Aix-la- 
Chapelle, or Aachen, where Charlemagne enshrined the Holy Thorns, 
"includes a large number of relics, vessels, and vestments, the most 
important being those known as the four 'Great Relics,' namely, 
the cloak of the Blessed Virgin, the swaddling-clothes of the infant 
Jesus, the loin-cloth worn by Our Lord on the Cross, and the cloth 
on which lay the head of John the Baptist after his beheading. They 
are exposed every seven years, and venerated by thousands of Pil- 
grims (139,628 in 1874, and 158,968 in 1881") ! (i, 92.) 

Without comment we let CE. record for the faith of its readers, 
several of the very notable and most remunerative Relics treasured 
by Holy Church. That they are all impossible, are all bogus, all crude 
forgeries and fakes only possible of credit by the most credulous 
child-minds, needs no comment. The sordid debasement of the human 
mind to the degree of credulity here displayed, the crass dishonesty 
of the false pretenses which give credit to these things for purposes 
of extortion from silly dupes of religion, the vastness of the grand 
larceny thus perpetrated in the name of God, are beyond orderly 

"The possession of the seamless garment of Christ is claimed by 
the Cathedral of Trier and by the parish church of Argenteuil; the 
former claims that the relic was -sent by the Empress St. Helena, 
basing their claim on a document sent by Pope Sylvester to the Church 
of Trier, but this cannot be considered genuine. . . . The relic itself 
offers no reason to doubt its genuineness. Plenary indulgences were 
granted to all pilgrims who should visit "the cathedral of Trier at the 
time of the exposition of the Holy Coat, which was to take place 
every seven years." (vii, 4*00-1.) "The Church venerates the Holy 
Innocents, or Martyrs, the children massacred by Herod, estimated 
in various Liturgies as 14,000, 64,000, 144,000 boys. The Church of 
Paul's Outside the Walls is believed to possess the bodies of several 


of the Holy Innocents. A portion of these relics was transferred by 
Sixtus V to Santa Maria Maggiore, The Church of St. Justina at 
Padua, the cathedrals of Lisbon and Milan, and other Churches also 
preserve bodies which they claim to be those of some of the Holy 
Innocents. It is impossible to determine the day or the year of the 
death of the Holy Innocents, since the chronology of the birth of 
Christ and the subsequent Biblical events is most uncertain" ! (CE. 
vii, 419.) 

In the cathedral of Cologne are preserved the skulls of the Three 
Wise Men who followed the Star of Bethlehem. In the neighboring 
Church of St. Gereon are distributed over the walls the bones from a 
whole cemetery, dug up and displayed as those of that mythical Saint 
and his Theban Band of 10,000 Martyrs ; in fitting competition are 
the spoils of the neighboring graveyard, yielding the bones of St. Ur- 
sula and her 11,000 Virgin Martyrs. The miraculous bones of Santa 
Rosalia in Palermo are the bones of a deceased goat ! 

"The city of Tarascon has for its patron, St. Martha, who, ac- 
cording to the legend, delivered the country from a monster called 
*Tarasque. J The Church of 'Saintes Marias de la Mer' contains three 
venerated tombs ; according to a tradition which is attached to the 
legends concerning the emigration of St. Lazarus, St. Martha, St. 
Mary Magdalen, and St. Maximus, these tombs contain the bodies of 
the three Marys of the Gospels." (CE. i, 238.) 

The Abbot Martin obtained for his monastery in Alsace the fol- 
lowing inestimable articles : A spot of the blood of our Saviour ; a piece 
of the True Cross ; the arm of the Apostle James ; part of the skeleton 
of John the Baptist; a bottle of the Milk of the Mother of God. 
(Draper, The Intellectual Development of Europe, ii, 57.) But per- 
haps none of these impostures surpassed in audacity that offered by 
a monastery in Jerusalem, which presented to the beholder ONE OF 
THE FINGERS OF THE HOLY GHOST! (Draper, Conflict be- 
tween Science and Religion, p. 270.) Also there were displayed sun- 
dry choice collections of the wmg and tail feathers of the said Holy 
Ghost, from time to time shed off or pulled out when, in the disguise of a 
Dove, It (or He or She ) came down and perched on people. In England 
at the time of Henry VIII (1501 ), Our Lady's girdle was shown in not 
less than eleven places, and Our Lady's milk, in a condensed form, in 


eight places. One of these girdles the good Queen-mother procured for 
Catherine of Aragon, on her marriage with Henry, to present to her 
when the expected time should come. During the plague of 1531, Henry 
VIII, for a goodly price, bought some precious relic waters to avert the 
plague from himself: a tear which Our Lord shed over Lazarus, pre- 
served by an angel who gave it in a phial to Mary Magdalene ; and a 
phial of the sweat of St. Michael when he contended with Satan, as 
recorded in the Book of Enoch and vouched for in the sacred Book 
of Jude. (Hackett, Henry VIII, pp. 11, 234.) The Cathedral of Arras, 
in France, possesses some highly venerated and remarkable relics, 
to wit, some of the Holy Manna which fell from Heaven in the year 
371 during a severe famine; and the identical Holy Candle, a wax 
taper, which was presented by the Blessed Virgin to Bishop Lambert, 
in 1105, to stop an epidemic. (CE. i, 752.) This same waxen Holy 
Candle has burned continuously from 1105 to at least 1713 without 
being to the slightest degree diminished, as his view of it was then 
reported by Anthony Collins, in his Discourse of Free Thinking; he 
expresses the doubt whether the attendant clergy would permit a care- 
ful scrutiny to be made of the phenomenon. 

A final job lot of these holy fetiches as recorded by Dr. McCabe 
with some pertinent comments, may be admired : "At Laon the chief 
treasures shown to the public were some milk and hair of the Virgin 
Jilary. This was Laon's set-off to the rival attraction at Soissons, a 
neighboring town, which had secured one of the milk-teeth shed by the 
infant Jesus. There seems to have been enough of the milk of the 
Virgin some of it was still exhibited in Spanish churches in the nine- 
teenth century preserved in Europe to feed a few calves. There was 
hair enough to make a mattress. There were sufficient pieces of *the 
true cross* to make a boat. There were teeth of Christ enough to 
outfit a dentist (one monastery, at Charroux, had the complete set). 
There were so many sets of baby-linen of the infant Jesus, in Italy, 
France and Spain, that one could have opened a shop with them. One 
of the greatest churches in Rome had Christ's manger-cradle. Seven 
churches had his authentic umbilical cord, and a number of churches 
had his foreskin (removed at circumcision and kept as a souvenir by 
Mary). One church had the miraculous imprint of his little bottom 
on a stone on which he had sat. Mary herself had left enough wedding 



rings, shoes, stockings, shirts, girdles, etc. to fill a museum; one of 
her shifts is still in the Chartres cathedral. One church had Aaron's 
rod. Six churches had the six heads cut off John the Baptist. . . . 
Every one of these things was, remember, in its origin, a cynical blas- 
phemous swindle. Each of these objects was at first launched upon the 
world with deliberate mendacity. . . . One is almost disposed to ask 
for an application to the clergy of the law about obtaining money 
under false pretenses." (McCabe, The Story of Religious Controversy^ 
p. 353.) 


These sacred and sanctified wonder-working objects are too nu- 
merous to more than mention a few of the most celebrated. Miraculous 
"waters" were in great profusion distilled or in some weird way ex- 
tracted from numbers of dead Saints, "blessed" for a variety of pur- 
poses, and vended under the names of the productive Saints ; as "The 
Water of St. Ignatius," of Sts. Adelhaid, Vincent Ferrer, Willibrord, 
etc. That of St. Hubert was notably a specific for the bite of mad dogs. 
The formulas for these holy extracts or emulsions, with their prop- 
erties and miraculous effects, are set forth in the official "Rituale 
Romanum." (CE. xv, 564.) The widely celebrated "Oil of Saints" was 
in immense vogue and possessed wonderful properties, as vouched by 
CE. under that title. This holy unction was "an oily substance which is 
said to have flowed, or still flows, from the relics or burial places of 
certain saints, and water which has in some way come in contact with 
their relics. These oils are or have been used by the faithful, with 
the belief that they will cure bodily and spiritual ailments . . . the 
custom prevailed of pouring oil over the relics or reliquaries of martyrs 
and then gathering it in vases, sponges or pieces of cloth. This oil, 
oleum martyris, was distributed among the faithful as a remedy 
against sickness. ... At present the most famous of the oils of saints 
is the oil of St. Walburga (Walburgis oleum). It flows from the stone 
slab and the surrounding metal plate on which rest the relics of St. 
Walburga in her church in Eichstadt in Bavaria. The fluid is caught 
in a silver cup and is distributed to the faithful for use against diseases 
of the body and soul. Similarly of the Oil of St. Menas, of which thou- 


sands of little flasks have recently been discovered, found at many 
places in Europe and Africa ; there is also a like Oil of St. Nicholas of 
Myra, which emanates from his relics at Bari in Italy, whither they 
were brought in 1087. A certain substance like flour, is recorded by St. 
Gregory of Tours, to emanate from the sepulchre of St. John the 
Evangelist ; also that from the sepulchre of the Apostle St. Andrew 
emanated manna in the form of flour and fragrant oil." A list half 
a column long is given of other saints from whose relics or sepulchres 
oil is said to have flowed. (CE. xi, 228-9.) 


"These are discs of wax impressed with the figure of a lamb 
and blessed at stated seasons by the Pope. The rule still fol- 
lowed is that the great consecration of the Agnus Dei takes place only 
in the first year of each pontificate and every seventh year after- 
wards. It seems probable that they had their beginning in some pagan 
usage of charms or amulets, from which the ruder populace were 
weaned by the employment of this Christian substitute [charm or 
amulet] blessed by prayer. The early history of Catholic ceremonial 
affords numerous parallels for this Christianizing of pagan rites. 
... So the purpose of these consecrated medallions is to protect 
those who wear or possess them from all malign influences. In the 
prayers of blessing, special mention is made of the perils from storm 
and pestilence, from fire and flood, and also of the dangers to which 
women are exposed in childbirth. Miraculous effects have been believed 
to follow the use of these objects of piety. Fires are said to have been 
extinguished, and floods stayed. They were much subject to counter- 
feit, the making of which has been strictly prohibited by various papal 
bulls," (this proving the obtaining of money by false pretenses in 
the papal monopoly of peddling them to the moron Faithful) . "There 
are also Agnus Deis made from wax mingled with the dust which is 
believed to be that of the bones of martyrs ; these are called Paste de* 
SS. Martiri, or Martyrs' Paste." (CE. i, 220.) The peddling of these 
frauds has not yet been forbidden by the criminal code, nor by the 
Vicars of God who gain by them. Three pages of a separate article 
are devoted to the potent prayers in Liturgies, several in doggerel 


Latin verse, on pages 221223. One of these inspired Papal invoca- 
tions over the sacred amulets is quoted by Dr. White : 

"O God, . . . we humbly beseech thee that thou wilt bless these waxen 
forms, figured with the image of an innocent lamb, . . . that, at the touch 
and sight of them, the faithful shall break forth into praises, and that the 
crash of hailstorms, the blast of hurricanes, the violence of tempests, the 
fury of winds, and the malice of thunderbolts may be tempered, and evil 
spirits flee and tremble before the standard of the holy cross, which is 
graven upon them." (White, Warfare between Science and Religion, i, 343.) 

The recurrence in modern times, of the above recited catastrophes 
raised by imps of the devil, not unseldom doing damage even to the 
Faithful and to their sacred edifices, must be due to the punible neglect 
to have a supply of these thaumaturgic crackers on hand at the time 
and place of the flagellations of the Evil One. 


What to a Rationalist may seem a very inhuman superstition 
though often attenuated by the clerical formula "With all my worldly 
goods I thee endow," pronounced to his earthly vicar by the happy 
"Bride of Jesus Christ," is the unctuously so-called Mystical Mar- 
riage, the nuptial ceremony whereby a deluded female enters into the 
joys of her Lord without actually sharing them. This holy mummery 
is thus described by the oft-cited Exponent of Catholic Truth: 

"Christian virginity has been considered from the earliest centuries 
as a special offering made by the soul to its spouse, Christ. ... In many 
of the lives of the Saints, the mystical marriage consists of a vision in which 
Christ tells a soul that He takes it for His bride, presenting it with the 
customary ring, and the apparition is accompanied by a ceremony; the 
Blessed Virgin Mary, saints and angels are present. . . . Moreover, as a 
wife should share in the life of her husband, and as Christ suffered for the 
redemption of mankind, the mystical bride enters into a more intimate 
participation of His sufferings, [casus omissus being the sharing of the 
.nuptial joys also involved in the notion of marriage] . Accordingly, in three 
cases out of four, the mystical marriage has been granted to stigmatics. 
History [priest- written, of course] has recorded seventy-seven mystical 
marriages, in connection with female saints, blesseds and venerables" ; 
a number of whom are named, including, appropriately, St. Mary Mag- 
dalen dei Passi "of the Crazy Ones" as were they all. (CE. ix, 703.) 



"Destruction to the Triumphant Beast!" 

Giordano Bruno. 
"E erases I'lnfame!" 


EVEN KOBE INDUCTIVE than its own sweet reasonableness and per- 
suasive truth, as accredited by the records and vouchers we have 
examined, were several very effective forcible aids to the propa- 
gation of the new Faith in the hearts and minds and upon the bodies 
of the Pagan populations. The strange phenomenon of the persis- 
tence of Christianity into the XXth Century can be understood only 
by consideration of the means employed for, and the medium of un- 
culture permitting, the propagation of this forged faith through 
the centuries of the Dark Ages of Faith, with its medieval "hang^- 
over" into the present scientific era. 



The Jewish forgers of the near-sacred Books of Enoch, Esdras, 
etc., had pilfered from the Sacred Books and System of Zoroaster of 
Persia, their superstitions of angels and devils and hell-fire, and had 
invented the infernal doctrines of Original Sin and eternal damnation 
therefor, all which counterfeit passed to and became current among 
the religious zealots of the debased Judaism then in vogue. Attributing 
their "revelation" or invention to Jesus Christ himself, the second- 
century forging Fathers of the new Faith bodily plagiarized these 
ready-made Pagan-Jewish superstitions, and by the potent "Sign of 
the Cross" metamorphosed them into holy "revelations" and inspired 
truths, the which to doubt was to be damned. 



The fanatic Hebrew religion and its derivative Christianity are 
the only religions ever known on earth based on and maintained by 
systematic persecution and murder. God-given laws of murder for 
disbelief were decreed at Sinai. A holy monopoly of priests was 
founded, and the divine ukase ordained : "They shall keep their priest- 
hood, and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death." (Num. 
iii, 10.) Murder was God-decreed: "The man that will do presumptu- 
ously, and will not hearken unto the priest, . . - even that man shall 
die." (Deut. xvii, 12.) Again the Jealous God decrees: "He that 
sacrificeth to any other god [thus admitting the other gods] 
save unto Yahveh alone, he shall be utterly destroyed." (Ex. xxii, 
20 ; Deut. xvii, 2-5.) The ne plus idtra of inspired atrocity of Divine 
legislation is this infamy devised by priests and attributed to their 
mythic God : "If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy daughter, 
or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, 
entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go serve other [more civilized] 
gods, . . . Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him ; 
neither shalt thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt 
thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely Mil him: thine hand shall be 
the first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all 
the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that Tie die"! (Deut. 
xiii, 6, 8-10; xvii, 2-7.) Old Elijah murdered by his God's help two 
companies of soldiers and their captains by calling down fire from 
heaven, and 450 priests of Baal and 400 priests of the phallic Ashe- 
rahs, to prove by these 1000 murders "if I be a man of the gods." 
(2 Kings, i, 12.) His old side-partner Elisha stood by and watched 
God-sent bears which he had invoked tear and eat forty small chil- 
dren who ill-manneredly thumbed their noses at his old bald pate ; and 
throughout the blessed Old Testament of God some hundreds of thou- 
sands of people were murdered by God outright and by his holy 
priestly agents, simply for differences of opinion or of conduct with 
respect or disrespect to the holy Hebrew God and religion. Only, 
fortunately, probably little of it is true. 

The Son of the Hebrew God came in course of time to Jewry os- 
tensibly to make amends for some of his Father's damning vengeances. 
He came "to fulfill the law" ; not only that, he overdid it and added 
to it sundry fiery climaxes of cursing and damnation, religious big- 


otry and intolerance unique to the "Gospel of Love" and of redemp- 
tive salvation. For sanctions ad terrorem of the new preachments of 
Christ who "came to bring the sword," Jesus himself kindled the fires 
of Hell and decreed eternal damnation for unbelief: "He that be- 
lieveth not shall be damned* 5 ; "Depart from me, ye cursed, into ever- 
lasting fire" ; "Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish" ; "He that 
believeth not the Son, the wrath of God abideth on him" ! These genial 
persuasions to belief in the priests were added to by Paul the Per- 
secutor ; harking back to his God's Law of Sinai : "He that despised 
Moses' law died without mercy ; ... Of how much sorer punishment 
. . . shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden under foot the 
Son of God?" "The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of 
God, and shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence 
of the holy angels and of the Lamb : And the smoke of their torment 
ascendeth forever and ever : and they shall have no rest day or night" 
from "the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God" ! AH this is for 
the happy Hereafter ; but the pious deviltry begins by Hell-on-earth, 
as the gentle Jesus himself prescribed: "Those mine enemies, which 
would not that I reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before 
me." (Luke, xix, 27.) The whole body of Apostles appealed for Divine 
permit, that "we command fire to come down from heaven, and con- 
sume them" (Luke ix, 54), who sought to imitate their pious devil- 
enchantments. Peter, Prince of Apostles, takes up the bloody cue: 
"Every soul which will not hear that prophet shall be destroyed" 
(Acts, iii, 23) ; and Bigot Paul enjoins proscription, boycott and 
murder for the dissentient: "For there are many unruly and vain 
talkers . . . whose mouths must be stopped" (Titus, i, 10, 11) : and 
"He that troubleth you ... I would they were even cut off" (Gal. 
v, 10, 12). The Church Persecutrix is thus amply warranted of its 
God in its holy task of "preserving the purity of the Faith" by fire 
and sword. Right quickly it began to "deal damnation 'round the 
land on all they deemed the foe" of the Faith and its priests. The 
rule of death to heretics was proclaimed by the "Prince" and executed 
by sword and stake by his holy "Successors" so long as they were let : 
"There shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in 
damnable heresies, . . . and bring upon themselves swift destruction" 
(2 Peter, ii, 1) ; and his arch-coadjutor Paul continued to go up and 



down the land "breathing out threatenings and slaughter" against 
all who despised his holy preachments, 

As we shall hear confessed: "Toleration came in only when Faith 
went out; lenient measures were resorted to only where power to 
apply more severe measures was wanting"! (CE. vii, 262.) The in- 
fernal fact that Intolerance is the "natural accompaniment" 1 of Re- 
ligion, and that obsessed religionists are no different from a man- 
burning mob of lynchers, is thus again confessed: "A kind of iron 
law would seem to dispose mankind to religious intolerance, (p. 35.) 
. . . When Christianity became the religion of the Empire, and still 
more when the peoples of Northern Europe became Christian nations, 
the close alliance of Church, and State, . . . heresy, m consequence* 
was a crime which secular rulers were "bound m duty to punish. . . . 
The heretic, in a word, was simply an outlaw whose offense, in the 
popular mind, deserved and sometimes received a punishment as sum- 
mary as that which is often dealt out in our day by an infuriated popu- 
lace to the authors of justly detested crimes. That such intolerance 
was not peculiar to Catholicism, but was the NATUBAL ACCOM- 
doned the Church, is evident from the measures taken by some of 
the Reformers [ex-children of True Church, who were there 
schooled and drilled in the infamies] against those voho differed "from 
them m matters of belief. . . . Moreover, . . . the spirit of intoler- 
ance prevalent in many of the American colonies during the seven- 
teenth and eighteenth centuries may be cited in proof thereof." (CE. 
viii, 35, 36.) The only way to kill the pernicious flower of Faith is to 
uproot and destroy the noxious weed ! 


Such as this, repeated ad infinitum for terror, coupled with the 
threats of the quick "Second Coming," when the Unbelievers should 
receive reward "unto the resurrection of damnation" (John v, 29), 
effectively seared the Gospel of fear and trembling into the supersti- 
tious Pagan dupes of Christianity, 

Hear for a moment the zealous Father Tertullian throw the fear 
of Hell into the trembling Pagan patrons of the theatre and the cir- 


cus. As quoted by Gibbon from the De Spectacuiis (Ch. 30), they 
are introduced with some pertinent words descriptive of the spirit of 
bigoted Christianity: "These rigid sentiments, which had been un- 
known to the ancient world, appear to have infused a spirit of bitter- 
ness into a system of love and harmony. The ties of blood and friend- 
ship were frequently torn asunder by the difference of religious faith ; 
and the Christians, who, in this world, found themselves oppressed by 
the power of the Pagans, were sometimes seduced by resentment and 
spiritual pride to delight in the prospect of their future triumph. 
'You are fond of spectacles,' exclaims the stern Tertullian ; 'expect 
the greatest of all spectacles, the last and eternal judgment of the 
universe. How shall I admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult, when 
I behold so many proud monarchs, and fancied gods, groaning in the 
lowest abyss of darkness ; so many magistrates, who persecuted the 
name of the Lord, liquefying in fiercer fires than they ever kindled 
against Christians; so many sage philosophers blushing in red-hot 
flames with their deluded scholars ; so many celebrated poets trembling 
before the tribunal, not of Minos, but of Christ ; so many tragedians, 
more tuneful in the expression of their own sufferings; so many 
dancers .* But the humanity of the reader will permit me to draw 
a veil over the rest of this infernal description, which the zealous 
African pursues in a long variety of affected and unfeeling witti- 
cisms." (Gibbon, Ch. xv, p. 146-7.) 


The damnable doctrine of Infant Damnation was one of the most 
terrifying and effective impostures of the Church to drive helpless 
victims into the fold of Christ. Infamous enough was the earlier doc- 
trine of exclusive salvation, that the unbaptized adult, the individual 
outside the Church was the heir to eternal damnation. But soon the 
terror was extended to the just-born infant, to even the foetus in its 
mother's womb. St. Augustine affirmed this atrocity with all his ve- 
hemence; all the Fathers without exception dinned it eternally, as 
yet today. A treatise of the greatest authority, De Fide, long attrib- 
uted to Augustine, but now known to be the work of Bishop St. Ful- 
gentius (CE. vi, 317) thus states the horrid doctrine : "Be assured, and 



doubt not, that not only men who have attained the use of their reason, 
but also little children who have begun to live in their mothers' womb 
and have there died, or who, having been just born, have passed away 
from the world without the sacrament of holy baptism, administered 
in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, must be punished by 
the eternal torture of undying fire ; for although they have committed 
no sin by their own will, they have nevertheless drawn with them the 
condemnation of original sin, by their carnal conception and nativ- 
ity. " (sec. 70.) Lecky, who quotes the passage, thus comments the 
effects as witnessed in practice throughout the Middle Ages : "Nothing 
indeed can be more curious, nothing more deeply pathetic, than the 
record of the many ways by which the terror-stricken mothers at- 
tempted to evade the awful sentence of their Church. Sometimes the 
baptismal water was sprinkled upon the womb ; sometimes the still- 
born child was baptised, in hopes that the Almighty would antedate 
the ceremony ; sometimes the mother invoked the Holy Spirit to purify 
by His immediate power the infant that was. to be born ; sometimes 
she received the Host or obtained absolution, and applied them to 
the benefit of her child. For the doctrine of the Church had wrung the 
mother's heart with an agony that was too poignant for even that 
submissive age to bear." (Rationalism in Europe, i, 362-364.) And 
all this on account of an apple eaten four thousand years before they 
were born; willed by the Deity who had foreordained their birth 
and premature death, before His Holy Church could come at the 
Baptismal fees ! 


With the miraculous "conversion of Constantine" to at least the 
practical advantages of Christianity as providing numerous partisans 
to his ambitious cause and great numbers of recruits to his armies, the 
Church of Christ emerged from obscurity and catacombs ; by dint of 
servile flatteries, bold impostures, and shameless forgeries, of which 
we have seen examples, it quickly insinuated itself into imperial favor 
and popular regard, and soon dominated the superstitious court and 
populace. This was a signal triumph for Faith, which now became 
popular and the means to preferment ; the truth of the Christ did now 


more rapidly spread and abound.. That such considerations, much 
more of this material world worldly than of the other-world of the 
spiritual, best further the cause of Christ and are its most powerful 
propaganda, is thus delicately confessed: "When a Government, for 
instance, reserves its favors and functions for the adherents of the 
State religion, the army of civil servants becomes a more powerful 
body of missionaries than the ordained ministers"! (CE. vii, 259.) 
Thus began that f unest League with Death and Covenant with Hell be- 
tween State and Church, persistent yet to this day ! 


But until the Christian priests poisoned his mind with their ar- 
rogant pretensions, Constantine was truly liberal in his policy of 
"religious indifferentism" or toleration. His broad-minded and states- 
man-like grasp of the principles of liberty of belief in any and all forms 
of religious superstition, or in none at all, rose to heights never since 
attained until Thomas Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious 
Freedom, reflected in Art. VI and Amendment I of the Federal Consti- 
tution. Constantine's Edict of Milan, of 313, was the first charter of 
religious freedom and toleration, securing equality and liberty of 
worship to the Christians, and very quickly repudiated by them 
as against all others ; it is preserved and thus quoted by Lactantius : 

"Not many days after the victory, Licinius ... on the ides of June 
(13th), while he and Constantine were consuls for the third time, he com- 
manded the following edict for the restoration of the Church, directed to 
the president of the province, to be promulgated: 

"When we, Constantine and Licinius, emperors, had an interview at 
Milan, and conferred together with respect to the good and security of the 
commonweal, it seemed to us that, amongst those things that are profitable 
to mankind in general, the reverence paid to the Divinity merited our first 
and chief attention, and that it was proper that the Christians and all others 
should have liberty to follow that mode of religion which to each of them 
appeared best; so that God, who is seated in heaven, might be benign and 
propitious to us, and to everyone under our government. And therefore we 
judged it a salutary measure, and one highly consonant to right reason, 
that no man should be denied leave of attaching himself to the rites of the 
Christians, or to whatever other religion his mind directed him, that thus 
the supreme Divinity, to whose worship we freely devote ourselves, might 
continue to devote His favour and beneficence to us. ... For it befits the 



well-ordered State and the tranquillity of our times that each individual be 
allowed, according to his own choice, to worship the Divinity ; and we mean 
not to derogate aught from the honour due to any religion or its votaries." 
(Lact., Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died, ch. xlviii; ANF. 
VII, 320; Eusebius, HE. viii, 17.) 


But no sooner had the priests of the new Superstition foisted them- 
selves securely into power, and by their threats of hell-fire dominated 
the superstitious minds of the ex-Pagan Constantine and his sons and 
successors, than the old decrees of persecution under which the Chris- 
tians had themselves suffered, were revamped and with fiendish ferocity 
turned by them into engines of fearful torture and destruction 
of Pagans, Jews, and "heretic'* Christians alike; and religious in- 
tolerance became the corner-stone of the Church Persecutrix. In the 
famous Code of Theodosius, about 384, it was at priestly instigation 
enacted : 

"We desire that all the people under our clemency should live by that 
religion which divine Peter the apostle is said to have given the Romans. 
. . . We desire that heretics and schismatists be subjected to various fines. 
. . . We decree also that we shall cease making sacrifices to the gods. And 
if anyone has committed such a crime, let him 'be stricken with the avenging 
sword." (Cod. Theod. xvi, 1, 2 ; v, 1 ; x, 4.) 

What a shaming Christian contrast to the Pagan Edict of Milan, 
granting religious liberty and tolerance to all ! In these laws of the 
now "Christian" empire priestly intolerance is made the law of the 
land ; the accursed words "Inquisition of the Faith" and "Inquisitors 5 * 
first appear in this Christian Code. "Theodosius I was called the 
Great because he was the first Emperor to act against heathenism, and 
also because he contributed to the victory over the Arians." (CE. iii, 

Even the "Infidel" Moslem, in his crude Koran, teaches a doctrine 
of tolerance to shame the Bible and the Christians : "Those who follow 
the Jewish religion, the Christians, the Sabeans, and whatever others 
believe in God and practice doing good, all these shall receive their rec- 


ompense from the Lord. . . . Virtue does not consist in turning the 
face towards the East nor towards the West to pray, but in being 
tolerant. 35 (Quran, ix, 59, 76 ; from Spanish text.) 


Holy Fraud and Forgery having achieved their initial triumph for 
the Faith, the "Truth of Christ" must now be maintained and en- 
forced upon humanity by a millennial series of bloody brutal Clerical 
Laws of pains and penalties, confiscations, civil disabilities, torture 
and death by rack, fire and sword, which constitute the foulest chapter 
of the Book of human history the History of the Church ! 

When the Christians were weak and powerless and subjected to 
occasional persecutions as "enemies of the human race," they were 
vocal and insistent advocates of liberty of conscience and freedom to 
worship whatever God one chose ; the Christian "Apologies" to the 
Emperors abound in eloquent pleas for religious tolerance ; and this 
was granted to them and to all by the Edict of Milan and other im- 
perial Decrees. But when by the favor of Constantine they got into 
the saddle of the State, they at once grasped the sword and began to 
murder and despoil all who would not pretend to believe as the Catholic 
priest commanded them to believe. When today the Church screams 
"Persecution !" and "Bigotry !" at every criticism and every attempt 
to restrict it in some of its presumptuous usurpations, let it recall a 
few of the laws of intolerance, plunder and death which it procured and 
enforced from the moment it got the prostituted power, so long as that 
power lasted. 

Beginning with Constantine, and under succeeding "Christian" 
emperors, there is a series of scores of laws which the Christians pro- 
cured to be enacted for the suppression and persecution to death of 
Pagans, heretics and Jews. These laws and edicts are to be found in the 
Codes of Theodosius and of Justinian, the two famous codifications of 
Roman Law. To exhibit the progressive and persistent system of 
proscription to which all but themselves were persecutingly subjected 
by the "Orthodox" Christians, I shall simply quote the titles of some 
of these laws, with indication of the names of the Emperors issuing 



them, the dates and number of the laws, and the Code or other source 
in which it is preserved. 


The earliest laws of Constantine were those granting religious 
toleration, as the Edict of Milan (313) already quoted, and laws for 
the redress of injuries done to Christians ; such as release of prisoners 
and those in servitude, and the restoration of property ; chapter 36 
declares that "The Church is the heir of those who leave no kindred ; 
and free gifts to it are confirmed"; chapter 41: "Those who have 
purchased property belonging to the Church or received it as a gift, 
are to restore it." (Eusebius, Vita Constantini, NfyPNF. Bk. II, chs. 

"Edict to the People of the Provinces Concerning the Error of Poly- 
theism." (Ib. chs. xlviii-xlix.) 

"Granting Money to the Churches." (Ib. Bk, x, ch. vi.) 

"Catholic Clergy exempt from Certain Civic Duties.'* (Code Theod. 
xvi, 2, 1; 313.) "The Catholic Church freed from Tribute." (Id. xi, 1, 1; 
315.) "Clergymen freed from Financial Burdens." (Id. xvi, 2, 2; 319.) 
"The Church allowed to Eeceive Bequests." (Id. xvi, 2, 4; 821.) 

"Bishop's Powers as Judges and Witnesses" : "Whatever may be settled 
by a sentence of bishops shall ever be held as sacred and venerable. . . . 
All testimony given, even by a single bishop, shall be accepted without 
hesitation, by every judge, neither shall the testimony of any other witness 
be heard, when the testimony of a bishop is brought forward by either 
party"! (Const. Sirm. i; 333.) 

"The Day of the Sun a Time of Rest." "All judges, and city folk and 
all craftsmen shall rest on the venerated day of the Sun' 9 (Cod, Just, iii, 
12, 2; 321.) 

"As it has seemed most unworthy that the Day of the Sun, famous by its 
venerable character, . . . Therefore on the festive day." (Cod. Theod. ii, 
8,1; 321.) 

A number of laws follow in favor of the Pagans, and while pro- 
hibiting "private divination and soothsaying," and "Malevolent 
Magic Prohibited, but Beneficial Magic Encouraged" ; also exempting 
Pagan Flamens, priests and magistrates from sundry restrictions and 
disabilities. No law of Constantine seems to be preserved which pre- 
scribes active persecution; he seems to have sought to hold an even 


balance of toleration to Pagans and Christians. But that he did enact 
such laws seems to be proved by recital in the first of the laws of his 
sons, Constantius and Constans, who were Arian heretics. 


"Sacrifice Prohibited." : "Let superstition cease and the folly of sacri- 
fices be abolished. Whoever has dared in the face of the law of the divine 
prince, our father [ Constantine] ... to make sacrifices, shall have appro- 
priate penalty, and immediate sentence dealt to him." (Cod. Theod. xvi, 
10, 2; 341.) 

"All Temples Closed and Sacrifices Forbidden." . . . "but if any one 
commit any offense of -this sort, let him fall by the avenging sword" and 
his property forfeited; judges neglecting to "mete out penalties for these 
offenses, they shall be similarly punished." (Cod. Theod. xvi, 10, 4; 

"Sacrificing and Idolatry Punishable by Death." "We order that all 
found guilty of attending sacrifices or of worshipping idols shall suffer 
capital punishment." (Id. xvi, 10, 6; 356.) 


"Wills of Apostate Christians to be Set Aside": "The right of making 
a will shall be taken from Christians who become pagans ; and if such per- 
sons make wills, they shall be set aside without regard to circumstances." 
(Cod. Theod. xvi, 7, 1; 381 : cf. Cod. Justin, i, 7, 2; 382.) 

"The Right to Bequeath or Inherit Property Denied Apostates": "We 
deny to Christians and the faithful who have adopted pagan rites and re- 
ligion all power of making a will in favor of any person whatsoever, in 
order that they may be without the Roman law [outlaws]; . . . even of 
enjoying a will with the power of acquiring an inheritance." (Cod. Theod. 
xvi, 7, 2; 383.) "The Right of Making a Will Denied Christians Who enter 
Temples." ( Id. xvi, 7 5 3 ; 383.) 


"Testamentary Disqualification for Christian Apostates," and Out- 
lawry as Witnesses. "Those who betray the sacred faith and profane 
holy baptism are shut off from association of all and from giving testimony. 
. . . They may not exercise the right of making a will, nor enter upon any; 
inheritance; they may not be made anyone's heir. 9 ' (Id. xvi, 7, 4; 391.) 

"Sacrificing and Visiting Shrines Prohibited." (Id. xvi, 10, 10; 391.) 
"Sacrifices Forbidden and Temples Closed." (Id. xvi, 10, 11; 391.) 

"PAGANISM OUTLAWED." "If any one dares [to sacrifice, etc.], 



let any man be free to accuse him and let him receive, as one guilty of lese 
majeste, . . . for it is sufficiently a crime.* 9 (Id. xvi, 10. 12; 392.) 


"Pagan Holidays Abolished." (Cod. Theod. ii, 8, 22; 395.) "Privi- 
leges of Pagan Priests Abolished." (Id. xvi, 10, 14; 396.) "Rural Temples 
to be Destroyed." (Id. xvi, 10, 16; 339.) "Temples to be Appropriated 
by the Churches." (Id. xvi, 5, 43 ; 408.) "Temples to be Appropriated by 
the Churches. Temple Buildings and their Revenues to be Confiscated and 
Idols and Shrines to be Destroyed." (Id. xvi, 5, 43; xvi, 10, 19; 407.) 

"Only Catholics to Serve as Palace Guards." (Cod. Theod. xvi, 5, 42; 

"Laws Against the Pagans to be Enforced" : "The Donatists and other 
vain heretics and those others who cannot be converted to the worship of 
the Catholic communion, Jews and Gentiles who are vulgarly known as 
pagans; . . . Let all judges understand, and not fail to carry out all de- 
crees against such persons. 1 ' (Id. xvi. 5, 46; 409.) 

"Pagans Barred from Civil and Military Offices." (Id. xvi, 10, 21 ; 416.) 
"Existing Laws against Pagans to be Enforced." (Id. xvi, 10, 22; 423.) 
"Pagans Who Sacrifice Shall Lose their Property and be Exiled. 99 (Id* 
xvi, 10, 23; 423.) 

"Pagan Superstition to be Rooted Out": "We are extirpating all 
heresies and all falsehoods, all schisms and all superstitions of the pagans 
and all errors that are inimicable to the Catholic religion. . . . And since 
all attempt at supplication is denied forever, they will be punished with 
the severity befitting crimes." (Id. xvi, 5, 63; 423.) 

"Pagans Barred from Pleading a Case or Serving as Soldiers": ". . . 
and every sect unfriendly with the Catholics* should be driven out of every 
city in order that they may not be sullied by the contagious* presence of 
criminals. We deny to Jews or pagans the right of pleading a case in court 
or of serving as soldiers." (Const. jSirm. No. 6 ; 425.) 


"Pagan Rites Forbidden and Bequests for Pagan Cults Prohibited.'* 
(Cod. Just.i, 11, 9; 472.) 

"Baptized Persons who follow Pagan Practices to Suffer Death. Pro- 
visions for the Conversion of the Unbaptized. Pagans Forbidden to Give 
Instruction" (Cod. Just. 1, 11, 10; no date given.) 

"Pagans Barred from Office and their Real Property Confiscated." "The 
Emperors Justin and Justinian. ... It is our intention to restore the ex- 
isting laws which affect the rest of the heretics of whatever name they are, 
(and we label as heretic whoever is not a member of the Catholic Church 
and of our orthodox and holy faith) ; likewise the pagans who attempt to 


introduce the worship of many gods, and the Jews and the Samaritans. 
. . . We forbid any of the above-mentioned persons to aspire to any dig- 
nity or to acquire civil or military office or to attain to any rank." (Id. i, 
5, 12; 527.) 

Thus was Pagan Superstition proscribed and destroyed by Chris- 
tian law and sword ; and the identical Pagan Superstitions under the 
veneer of the name of Christian established and enthroned. The sub- 
ject is thoroughly examined by Prof. Maude A. Huttmann, in The 
Establishment of Christianity Through the Proscription of Paganism; 
(Columbia University Press, 1914). 


A graphic sketch of the origin, the universal scope, and the crush- 
ing effect of the early imperial laws, supplemented and expanded by 
those of medieval and more modern times, is given by CE., related with 
all the sinister and cynical insolence, sophistry and hypocrisy of 
intolerant bigotry. To its Christ it imputes the horrid justification of 
the sword and the infernal principles of butchery whereby the Church 
Murderess has "made a hell of earth to merit heaven." This recital is 
not alone of ancient sacred history ; CE. admits : "These primitive 
views on heresy have been faithfully transmitted and acted on by the 
Chufch in subsequent ages ; there is no break in the tradition from St. 
Peter to Pious X." (vii, 259.) The principles are yet alive and 
cherished, their practical application has only for the time being 
"fallen into abeyance," only, for the reason that in these modern 
skeptical times "the power to apply more severe measures is wanting." 
Here is the admitted ecclesiastical record of repression and murder 
to maintain its forged and fraudulent faith : 

"When Constantine had taken upon himself the office of lay bishop 
(episcopus externus) and put the secular arm at the service of the 
Church, the laws against heretics became more and more rigorous. 
Under the purely ecclesiastical discipline no temporal punishment 
could be inflicted on the obstinate heretic, except the damage which, 
might arise to his personal dignity through being deprived of all inter- 
course with his former brethren. But under the Christian emperors 
rigorous measures were enforced against the goods and persons of here- 



tics. From the time of Constantine to Theodosius and Valentinian III 
(313-424) various penal laws were enacted against heretics as being 
guilty of crime against the State. In both the Theodosian and Justin- 
ian codes they were styled infamous persons ; all intercourse was for- 
bidden to be held with them ; they were deprived of all offices of profit 
and dignity in the civil administration, while all burdensome offices, 
both of the camp and of the curia, were imposed upon them ; they were 
disqualified from disposing of their own estates by will, or of accept- 
ing estates bequeathed to them by others ; they were denied the right of 
giving or receiving donations, of contracting, buying, and selling; 
pecuniary fines were imposed upon them ; they were often proscribed 
and banished, and in many cases scourged before being sent into exile. 
In some particularly aggravated cases sentence of death was pro- 
nounced upon heretics, though seldom executed in the time of the 
Christian emperors of Rome. Theodosius is said to be the first who 
pronounced heresy a capital crime ; this law was passed in 382 against 
[several named sects of heretics]. Heretical teachers were forbidden 
to propagate their doctrines, publicly or privately; to hold public 
disputations ; to ordain bishops, presbyters, or other clergy ; to hold 
religious meetings; to build conventicles or to avail themselves of 
money bequeathed to them for that purpose. Slaves were allowed to 
inform against their heretical masters and to purchase their freedom 
by coming over to the Church. The children of heretical parents were 
denied their patrimony and inheritance unless they returned to the 
Catholic Church. The books of heretics were ordered to be burned. 
( Vide Codex Theodosianus, lib. XVI, tit. 5, "De Hareticis") 

"This legislation remained in force and with even greater severity 
in the Kingdoms formed by the victorious barbarian invaders on the 
ruins of the Roman Empire in the West, The burning of heretics was 
first decreed in the eleventh century. The Synod of Verona (1184) 
imposed on bishops the duty to search out heretics in their dioceses and 
hand them over to the secular power. Other Synods, and the Fourth 
Lateran Council (1215) under Pope Innocent III, repeated and en- 
forced this decree, especially the Synod of Toulouse (1229), which 
established inquisitors in every parish (one priest and two laymen). 
Everyone was bound to denounce heretics, the names of the witnesses 
were kept secret; after 1243, when Innocent III sanctioned the laws 

of Emperor Frederick II and of Louis IX against heretics, torture 
was applied m trials; the guilty persons were delivered up to the civil 
authorities and actually burnt at the stake. 

"Paul III (1542) established, and Sixtus V organized, the Roman 
Congregation of the Inquisition, or Holy Office, a regular court of 
justice [ ! ] dealing with heresy and heretics. (See Roman Congre- 
gations.) The Congregation of the Index, instituted by St. Pius V, 
has for its province the care of faith and morals in literature ; it pro- 
ceeds against printed matter very much as the Holy Office proceeds 
against persons (see Index of Prohibited Books). The present pope, 
Pius X (1909), has decreed the establishment in every diocese of a 
board of censors and of a vigilance committee whose functions are to 
find out and report on writings and persons tainted with the heresy of 
Modernism (Encycl. Tascendi,' 8 Sept. 1907). [At another place 
the pious clerical reason for this flagrant attempt against the mind and 
its liberty of inquiry is thus with unctuous priestly speciousness stated : 
"for it is notorious that clever sophistry coated with seductive 
language may render even gross errors of faith palatable to a guile- 
less and innocent heart"! (CE. xiv, 766).] The present-day legis- 
lation against heresy has lost nothing of its ancient severity ; but the 
penalties on heretics are now only of the spiritual order ; all the punish- 
ments which require the intervention of the secular arm have fatten 
into abeyance. . . . 

"The Church's legislation on heresy and heretics is often reproached 
with cruelty and intolerance. Intolerant it is ; in fact its raison d 9 etre 
is intolerance of doctrines subversive of the Faith. Cruelty only comes 
when the punishment exceeds the requirements of the case. . . . It 
suffices to remark that the inquisitors only pronounced on the guilt of 
the accused and then handed him over to the secular power to be dealt 
with according to the laws framed by emperors and kings [at the 
instigation of the Church !]. 

"Toleration came in only when -faith went out; lenient measures were 
WANTING. , . . Christ says: 'Do not think that I am come to send 
peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 9 The history 
of heresy verifies this prediction"! (CE. vii, 256-262, passim.) 

The Church Persecutrix, under this forged Christ-Lie, has shed 



oceans more of blood than of its boasted "light" upon religion-cursed 
Christendom. The only "light" it has diffused has been from the flames 
of "heretic" cities, and the lurid fires of myriads of Autos-da-Fe, kin- 
dled by hypocrite priests, burning in agony the bodies of countless 
heroic men and women who scorned to prostitute their minds to the 
sinister lies of priestcraft, and who have dared defy with their lives the 
blighting "rule and ruin" dominion of the power-lusting Church. 

With a shudder of undying loathing for the cruel cynical Hypo- 
crite, we may admire the sweet charity of tender mercy displayed by 
the Holy Church of the Christ, exampled in the sanctimonious Form- 
ula of Judgment whereby its Holy Inquisition handed over the 
racked and broken errant Child of Faith to the prostituted Secular 
Arm for the final Act of Murder the blessed Auto-da-Fe, with a 
prayer for the hated heretics: "Ut quam clementissime ei sine sanr 
guinis effusionem puniretur should be punished as mildly as possible 
and without the shedding of blood" ! The while Their Holinesses kept 
a standing Decree of Indulgences from the pangs of Purgatory for all 
the hoodlum Faithful who would please and glorify God by attending 
the sacred ceremonials of Burning, and especially to those who would 
aid God and the priests by fetching fagots for the consecrated fires, 
and throw water on the wood so that the priest-set flames would be 
slower in their purifying work and allow the writhing "Obstinate" 
longer time to make Peace with God and Holy Church by meet Re- 
pentance ; in which event, the "reconciled" Child of Faith would be 
dragged from the flames only partly cremated, and returned to prison 
cell there to agonize out the remainder of his life in rapt contempla- 
tion of the beauties and sweetness of the blessed Christian Religion, 
crooning "Praise God from whom all blessings flow !" 

The foregoing loathsome boasted record of the Church, sinister and 
infamous as it is, may be complemented by the following cynical and 
sophistical recital of the mental and moral debauch of ignorance im- 
posed by the Church, concluding with the formal admission that "the 
theocratic State was called upon [by its prostituted mistress the 
Church] to avenge with the pyre" defiance of the lying fraudulent 
pretensions of the Church : 

"During the Middle Ages the Church guarded the purity and genu- 
ineness of her Apostolic doctrine [ ! ] through the institution of the 


ecclesiastical (and State) Inquisition. , . . Following the example 
of the Apostles, the Church- today watches zealously over the purity 
and integrity of her doctrine, since on this rests her 'whole system of 
faith and morals, the whole edifice of Catholic thought, ideals, and Ufe. 
For this purpose the Church instituted the Index of Prohibited Books, 
which is intended to deter Catholics from the unauthorized reading of 
books dangerous to faith or morals, for it is notorious that clever 
sophistry coated with seductive language may render even gross errors 
of faith palatable to a guileless and innocent heart, (p. 766.) . . . 
Now, formal heresy was likewise strongly condemned by the Catholic 
[Middle Ages ; and so the argument ran : Apostacy and heresy are, as 
criminal offenses against God, far more serious crimes than high 
treason, murder, or adultery. . . . But, according to Romans xiii, 
11, seq., the secular authorities have the right to punish, especially 
grave crimes, with death ; consequently, 'heretics may be not only ex- 
communicated, but also justly (juste) put to death 9 (St. Thomas, 
II II, Q; xi, a, 3). . . . The earliest example of the execution of a 
heretic was the beheading of the ring leader of the Priscillianists by 
the usurper Maximus at Trier (385). Even St. Augustine, towards 
the end of his life, favoured State reprisals against the Donatists. 
. . . Influenced by the Roman code, which was rescued from oblivion, 
Frederick II introduced the penalty of burning for heretics by im- 
perial law of 1224. The popes, especially Gregory IX, favoured the 
execution of this imperial law, in which they saw an effective means 
for the preservation of the Faith. . . . Unfortunately, neither the 
secular nor the ecclesiastical authorities drew the slightest distinction 
between dangerous and harmless heretics, seeing forthwith in every 
(formal) heresy a 'contumelia Creatoris, 9 which the theocratic State 
was called upon to avenge with the pyre." (CE. xiv, 766, 768. ) 


"Hypocrites ! Ye compass land and sea to make one proselyte, and when 
he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves !" 
Jesus. (Matt, xxiii, 15.) 

"The barbarous penal forms of the Middle Ages are to be credited, 
not to the Church, but to the State"! (CE. xiv, 768,) It is a monstrous 



hypocritical perversion of truth to pretend, as the Church ever does, 
that these inhuman and devastating legal enactments and deeds of 
fire and blood, which ad horrendwm we have just read in faint outline 
from secular and ecclesiastical history, and which brought several 
"Most Christian" nations to utter ruin, moral and economic, were the 
voluntary and spontaneous expressions of the social policy of secular 
rulers, enacted and wrought against their subjects in order to pre- 
serve the peace and safety of the State and to regulate the civil and 
political conduct of their peoples. The Church, by fraud and fear, 
brought the secular rulers under her ignominious domination, and 
forced them by her threats, as we have seen proved and admitted, to 
make and enforce these infernal enactments and destructions. "This 
is the stale pretense of the Clergy in all countries, after they have 
solicited the government to make penal laws against those they call 
heretics or schismatics, and prompted the magistrates to a vigorous 
execution, then to lay all the odium on the civil power; for whom 
they have no excuse to allege, but that such men suffered, not for 
religion, but for disobedience to the laws." (Somers Tracts, vol. 
xii, p. 534 ; cited by Buckle, Hist, of Civilization in England, i, p. 

But the Church waited not for the secular rulers to obey her 
murderous behests to "avenge with the pyre" the crime of disbelieving 
and deriding the Faith, nor did she lose time while watching the execu- 
tion of her commands of murder by the secular arm. The Church was 
itself a secular ruler over then vast territories, the stolen "Patrimony 
of Peter" or States of the Church; and for those territories their 
Royal-Holinesses set the example of murder and burning of their own 
heretics. His Holiness Pope Gregory IX (1227-41) was, we are told, 
"very severe towards heretics, who in those times were universally 
looked upon as traitors and punished accordingly. . . . When in 
1224 Frederick II ordered that heretics in Lombardy should be burnt 
at the stake, Gregory IX, then Papal Legate, approved and published 
the imperial law. In 1231 the Pope enacted a law -for Rome that 
heretics condemned by an ecclesiastical court should be delivered to the 
secular power to receive their *due punishment.' This 'due punishment* 
was death by fire for the obstinate and imprisonment for Ufe for the 
penitent. In pursuance of this law a number were arrested in Rome, 


burnt at the stake, and imprisoned." (CE. vi, 797.) And it was in 
Rome, by law and command of His Royal-Holiness Clement VIII, that 
the defier of the "Triumphant Beast," Giordano Bruno, was burned 
alive in Rome in 1600. 

The hypocritical lie is repeated and in the same breath belied. 
"Officially it was not the Church that sentenced unrepenting heretics 
to death, more particularly to the stake . . . Gregory IX ... 
admitted the opinion, then prevalent among legists, that heresy should 
be punished with death, seeing that it was confessedly no less serious 
an offense than high treason. . . . [The succeeding popes went from 
opinions to acts.] In the Bull 'Ad Extirpanda 9 (1252) Innocent IV 
says : 'When those adjudged guilty of heresy have been given up to the 
civil power by the bishop or his representative, or the Inquisition, the 
podesta or chief magistrate of the city shall take them at once, and 
shall, within five days at the most, execute the laws made agamst them. 9 
Moreover, he directs that this Bull and the corresponding regulations 
of Frederick II [for burning heretics] be entered in every city among 
the municipal statutes under pain of excommunication, which was also 
visited on those who failed to execute both the papal and the imperial 
decrees. . . . The passages [of the imperial decrees] which ordered 
the burning of impenitent heretics were inserted in the papal decretals. 
. . . The aforesaid Bull 'Ad Extirpanda' remained thenceforth a 
fundamental document of the Inquisition, renewed or reinforced by 
several popes, Alexander IV (1254-61), Clement IV (1265-68), 
Nicholas IV (1288-92), Boniface VIII (1294-1303), and others. 
The civil authorities, therefore, were enjoined by the popes, under 
pain of excommunication to execute the legal sentences that cow 
demned impenitent heretics to the stake. It is to be noted that excom- 
munication itself was no trifle, for, if the person excommunicated did 
not free himself from excommunication within a year, he was held by 
the (papal) legislation of that period to be a heretic, and incurred all 
the penalties that affected heresy." (CE. viii, 34.) 

Here it may be remarked, that prescription or statute of limita- 
tions runs not agamst the murderer. Thus Holy Church, who has 
murdered and procured the murder of millions, can never escape the 
just verdict and fatal sentence for her crimes before the bar of Civili- 
zation. Impotent now, senile, but venomous still in intention, she reeks 



yet with the blood of her slain ; their ghosts, like Banquo's, will never 
down. They cry yet to Humanity : Ecrasez I'Infcme! 

We have just read from CE. the confession that "the theocratic 
State was called upon to avenge with the pyre" all forms of heresy or 
hate for the Church as a "contumelia Creatoris." Again it says 
again contradicting its false pretense that the State is alone to be 
"credited" with these pious infamies : "After the Christianized Roman 
Empire had developed into a theocratic (religious) State, it was 
compelled [by whom but by the Church with its terrorizing threats 
to the superstitious rulers] to stamp crimes- against faith (apostasy, 
heresy, schism) as offenses against the State, (cf. Cod. Justin., I, 5, 
de Haer. : 'Quod in religionem divinam committitur, in omnium fertur 
injuriam.') Catholic and citizen of the State became identical terms. 
Consequently crimes against faith were high treason, and as such were 
punishable with death." (CE. xiv, p. 768.) A truer statement of the 
direful consequences of this enforced prostitution of the "secular arm" 
of the State to the criminal purposes of the Church in coercing its false 
and accursed religion upon humanity, cannot be made than this con- 
fession, in specious and unctuous words : "The role of heresy in history 
is that of evil generally. Its roots are in corrupted human nature. It 
has come over the Church as predicted by Tier Divine Fou/nder; It has 
rent aswnder the bonds of charity in families , provinces, states, and 
nations; the sword has been drawn and pyres erected both for its de- 
fense and its repression; misery and ruin have followed in its track"! 
(CE. vii, 261.) The confessed accursed record of Christianity I 

The utter dependence of the Church for the beginnings and for the 
persistence of its bloody dominance, upon the extorted favors and 
support of the prostituted "Secular Arm" of the State to do its dirty 
work of subjection, is confessed and illustrated by two instances, one 
with respect to the overthrow of Paganism, the other accounting for 
the ultimate suppression of the early heretical sects. Of the former, 
it is "credited" to the Emperor Gratian : "In the same year, 375, he 
abolished all the privileges of the pagan pontiffs and the grants for 
the support of the pagan worship. Deprived of the assistance of the 
State, paganism rapidly lost influence. ... He made apostasy a 
crime punishable by the State." (CE. vi, 729.) With a clerical slur at 
the "fanciful speculations of the Eastern sects so dear to the Eastern 


mind," oblivious of the equally fanciful "Oriental speculations' 9 which 
are the only source of the holy dogmas of Western Christianism, it is 
cynically recorded: . . . "but, lacking the support of the temporal 
power, they sank [just as "orthodox" Christianity would have sunk 
to oblivion] under the anathema of the guardians of the depositum 
fidei" holding the sword. (CE. vii, 259.) 

As elsewhere suggested, it is pertinent to remark, that history would 
quickly repeat itself in this highly-to-be-desired respect, with the 
withdrawal of "the support of the temporal power," through the im- 
mense and illegal support yet given to the Beggar Church through 
deadhead tax exemption on its thousands of millions of dollars of ill- 
gotten, idle and hoarded properties. 

"St. Augustine seems to have originated the application of the 
words 'Compel them to enter in/ to religious persecution. Religious 
liberty he emphatically cursed: 'Quid est eni/m pejor, mors animce 
quam libertas errorisf For which is worse, the death of the soul than 
the liberty of error?' (Epistle clxvi.) Boniface III decreed excom- 
munication of any magistrate who either altered the sentence of the 
Inquisition, or delayed more than six days in carrying it into execu- 
tion. In the beginning of the thirteenth century, Innocent III 
instituted the Inquisition, and issued the first appeal to princes to 
employ their power for the suppression of heresy. In 1209, De Mont- 
fort (at Innocent's instigation), began the massacre of the Albigenses. 
In 1215, the Fourth Council of the Lateran enjoined all rulers 9 fi as they 
desired to be esteemed faithful, to swear a public oath that they would 
labor earnestly, and to the full extent of their power, to exterminate 
from their dominions all those who were branded as heretics by the 
Church. 9 The Council of Avignon, in 1209, enjoined all bishops to call 
upon the cvcXL power to exterminate heretics. The Bull of Innocent III 
threatened any prince who failed to extirpate heretics from his realm 
with excommunication, and with the loss of his realm. 99 (Lecky, 
History of the Rise and Progress of Rationalism m Europe^ vol. II, 
chap, iv, passim.) 

As confessedly "tolerance came in only when faith went out," eternal 
gratitude and glory are the due meed of RATIONALISM, which has 
struck the sword and the stake from the armory of Faith, and left it a 
jaded sycophant begging "tolerance" of and for its bloody self. 


England was rather distant from Rome and the English spirit did 
not yield so debasedly as some others did to the orders and dominion 
of priestcraft ; but so early as Alfred the Great, so vaunted by the 
Church for his piety and learning, we have this picture of prostitution 
of State to Church ; and the effects on both : "In the joint code of laws 
published by Alfred and Guthrum, apostasy was declared a crime, the 
payment of Peter's Pence was commanded, and the practice of heathen 
rites was forbidden. . . . But the clergy, . . . discharging in each 
district the functions of local state officials, seem never to have quite 
regained the religious spirit." (CE. i, 507.) 

Out of scores of instances of legal enactments made by superstitious 
rulers under the terrors of papal threats, I cite here but one, in the 
quaint words of a militant philosopher : "Consequent to this claim of 
thePopetobetheVicarGenerallof Christ in the present Church . . . 
is the doctrine of the fourth Counsell of Lateran, held under Pope In- 
nocent the third (Chap. 3, de Hcereticis), That if a King at the Popes 
admonition, doe not purge his Kingdom of Haeresies, and being ex- 
communicate for the same, doe not give satisfaction within a year, 
his Subjects are absolved of the bond of their obedience. Where, by 
Haeresies are understood all opinions which the Church of Rome hath 
forbidden to be maintained." (Hobbes, Leviathan, Pt. iv, ch. 44, p. 
333; 1651.) The infallible but presumptuous claim of the Vicars of 
God may be stated in the terms of the famous Bull of the "Two 

"Under the control of the Church are two swords, that is, two powers. 
, . . Both swords are in the power of the Church, the spiritual and the tem- 
poral; the spiritual is wielded m the Church by the hand of the clergy; the 
secular i$ to be employed for the Church by the hand of the civil authority, 
but under the direction of the spiritual power. The one sword must be sub- 
ordinate to the other; the earthly power must submit to the spiritual au- 
thority, as this has precedence of the secular on account of its greatness 
and sublimity; for the spiritual power has the right to establish and guide 
the secular power, and also to judge it when it does not act rightly. . . . 
This authority, although granted to man, and exercised by man, is not a hu- 
man authority, but rather a Divine one granted to Peter by Divine commis- 
sion and confirmed in him and his successors. Consequently, whoever 
opposes this power ordained of God opposes the law of God." (Bull Unam 
Sanctam, Boniface VIII, Nov. 18, 1302 ; CE. xv, 126.) 


Our review of the Forgery Founded Church having demonstrated 
the monstrous falsity of every divine premise of this "Bull," the hollow 
sham of these sonorous braggart phrases is ghastlily apparent. They 
are priestly lies ! 


"And the Lord said unto his servant, Go into the highway and hedges, 
and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled." Jesus. (Luke 
xiv, 23.) 

Disparaging the commands of its Lord to force them in, his Vicar- 
ate apologizes: "Instances of compulsory conversions such as have 
occurred at different periods of the Church's history must be ascribed 
to the misplaced zeal of autocratic individuals." (CE. xi, 703.) The 
facts of history, as cited by CE. itself, belie this apologetic clerical 
passing of the odium for such felonious duress to autocratic individu- 
als uninfluenced by the "moral" constraint of the Church-beneficiary 
and unswayed by its anathemas and threats of formal excommunica- 
tion. A criminal who resorts to murder to prevent the escape of the 
victims who support him, would readily threaten murder to add greatly 
to the number of his supporting victims. It was St. Augustine himself, 
greatest pillar and authority of the Church Persecutrix, who first in- 
voked the Christ's fatal fanatic command, "Compel them to come in," 
as complementary to the bloody edicts of the earlier "Christian" em- 
perors and of his own fatuous fulminations against the "liberty of 
error," as above noticed. The first temptation to come to Christ was 
by bribes, as when Constantine offered a gold coin and a clean baptis- 
mal robe to all who would undergo that process ; and the example of 
the Emperor in favoring Christianity drew great numbers of servile 
subjects to the feast of the Lord. We have read the cynical confession : 
that when governments favor a religious sect by giving its adherents 
all the offices and honors of the State and excluding all opponents, "the 
army of civil servants becomes a more powerful body of missionaries 
than the ordained ministers," When Clovis came to Christ he tolled 
SOOO of his retainers into the baptismal font with him at one time. 
Pepin "had been filled with this lofty conception, consequently ex- 
traordinary success attended the missionary labours of the Church. 



. . . The conversion of the Avars had been attempted by the Ba- 
varian Duke; after their subjugation, they were placed under the 
jurisdiction" of high prelates of the Church. (CE. v, 611.) "When 
the conversion of their prince was publicly known, the (people) of his 
kingdom are said to have flocked in crowds to receive the Christian 
faith." (CE.i, 669.) 

When Charlemagne spent those seven days in Rome with His Holi- 
ness, who tricked him into believing that "his imperial dignity was an 
act of God, made known, of course, through the agency of the Vicar 
of Christ" (CE. iii, 615) , and they together formed those "many great 
designs for the glory of God and the exaltation of the Church," due 
execution of the command of the Christ, "Compel them to come in," 
was one of the great designs conspired with His Vicar: "True to his 
own and his father's understanding with the pope, he invariably in- 
sisted on baptism as the sign of submission, punishing with appalling 
barbarity any resistance, as when, in cold blood, he beheaded in one 
day 4500 persons at Verdun, in A. D. 782. Under such circumstances it 
is not wonderful that clerical influence extended so fast. Always bear- 
ing in mind his engagement with the papacy, that Roman Christianity 
should be enforced upon Europe wherever his influence could reach, 
he remorselessly carried into execution the penalty of death that he 
had awarded to the crimes of: 1. refusing baptism; 2. false pretense 
of baptism ; 3. relapse to idolatry ; 4. the murder of a bishop or priest ; 
5. human sacrifice ; 6. eating meat in Lent. To the pagan German his 
sword was a grim, but convincing missionary." (Draper, The Inielr 
lectual Development of Europe, i, 374.) This secular authority is con- 
firmed by this clerical admission ; that under the Carlovingian Empire, 
*% war conversion went hand in hand with victory; in peace Charles 
ruled through bishops. . . . The Teutonic Order began the great 
conflict which after more than half a century of bloodshed dealt the 
death-blow to paganism in Prussia." (CE. iii, 700, 705.) Conversion 
by force and arms continued through the Ages of Faith and brought 
entire nations to Christ : "More lasting success followed the attempts, 
patterned on the Crusades, to carry on wars of conversion and conquest 
in those territories of north-eastern Europe peopled by tribes that had 
lapsed from the Faith or that were still heathen ; among such pagans 
were the Obotrites, Pomeranians, Wiltzi, Serbs, Letts, Livonians, 


Finns, and Prussians. The preliminary work was done in the twelfth 
century by missionaries. They were aided with armed forces [by 
several kings and rulers]. From the beginning of the thirteenth cen- 
tury Crusades were undertaken against Livonia, Courland, Esthonia, 
and Prussia. In Lithuania Christianity did not win until 1368." (CE. 
v, 612.) In Hungary, during the tenth and eleventh centuries, "the 
new religion was spread by the sword. . . . With these laws King St. 
Stephen brought over almost all his people to the Catholic Faith. . . . 
He [a later King] took strong measures against those who had fallen 
away from the Faith." (CE. vii, 548-9.) 

Thus it was that by war and bloody imposition rather than by 
washing in the Blood of the Lamb, "vast tribes of savages who had 
always been idolaters, who were perfectly incapable, from their low 
state of civilization, of forming any but anthropomorphic conceptions 
of the Deity, or of concentrating their attention steadily on any 
visible object, and who for the most part were converted, not by indi- 
vidual persuasion, but by the commands of their chief s 9 embraced 
Christianity in such multitudes that their habits soon became the 
dominating habits of the Church. From this time the tendency to 
idolatry was irresistible. The old images were worshipped under new 
names." (Lecky, Rationalism m Europe, i, 218.) The brand of conver- 
sion was marked by the outfit of missionaries and military auxiliaries 
who first caught the barbarians ; and if the wrong kind got them first, 
it made all the difference in the world in point of whether the result was 
the intelligent working of the Holy Ghost or sheer ignorance. The 
great Bishop "Ulphilas (311-388) taught the Goths the Arian 
theology ; Arian kingdoms arose in Spain, Africa, Italy. The Gepidae, 
Heruli, Vandals, Alans, and Lombards received a system which they 
were as little capable of understanding as they were of defending, and 
the Catholic bishops, the monks, the sword of Clovis, the action of the 
papacy, made an end of it before the eighth century." (CE. i, 707.) 
Arianism was very simple ; it held that there was but a One-Person 
God, and denied the Blessed Trinity of Three-in-One. Thus Arianism 
was "an attempt to rationalize the Creed by stripping it of mystery 
so far as the relation of Christ to God was concerned" (/&.) But this 
simple and de-mystified theology, the non-Catholic barbarians were 
too ignorant to understand; whereas, the other barbarians whose 



minds were enlightened by the Holy Ghost at the point of the Catholic 
sword, were perfectly intelligent to comprehend the Mystery of the 
Holy Trinity, which would have stumped Aristotle. The Arians had 
only to follow the ordinary Multiplication Table "One times One is 
One" ; whereas the Orthodox had to multiply curiously, "Three times 
One is One !" The true formula is Three times Naught is Nothing ! 


In truth, however, "these nations were only Christianized upon the 
surface, their conversion being indicated by little more than their 
making the sign of the cross." (Draper, Op. cit., i, 365.) True, indeed, 
it is, as is scores of times confessed : "Paganism had not been renewed 
in Christ." (CE. iii, 700.) "Christians who considered themselves 
faithful, held in a measure to the worship of the sun. Leo the Great in 
his day says that it was the custom of many Christians to stand on the 
steps of the Church of St. Peter and pay homage to the Sun by 
obeisance and prayers." (CE. iv, 297 ; cf, iii, 724-727.) And generally 
was it true : "The pagani retained the worship of the old gods even 
after they were all Christianized." (CE. vi, 12.) Among the Germans, 
and it is exactly as with all others, "the acceptance of the Christian 
name and ideas was at first a purely mechanical one." (CE. vi, 485.) 

As the result of the superficial veneer, in the early days when perse- 
cution occasionally broke out, and offering incense to the statue of 
Dea Roma or the Emperor was the test of Pagan patriotism, great 
numbers of laity and even of clergy "flocked at once to the altars of 
the heathen idols to offer sacrifice." (CE. ix, 2.) "The apostates and 
the timid who had bought a certificate of apostasy, became so numer- 
ous as to fancy that they could lay down the law to the Church, . . . 
a state of affairs which gave rise to controversies and deplorable 
troubles, A bishop, followed by his whole community, was to be seen 
sacrificing to the gods." (CE. i, 191.) At first the Church "imposed 
perpetual penance and excommunication without hope of pardon" on 
the backsliders ; "however, the great number of Lapsi and Libellatici 
... led to a relaxation of the rigour of ecclesiastical discipline, leav- 
ing the forgiveness of the sin to God alone" (CE. i, 624), while their 
easy return to the decimated fold of Holy Church immensely increased 


its sacred revenues and extended its sway. However, "when the Roman 
Empire became Christian, apostates were punished by deprivation of 
all civil rights. They could not give evidence in a court of law, and 
could neither bequeath nor inherit property. To induce anyone to 
apostatize was an offense punishable with death, under the Theodosian 
Code, XVI, 7, De Apostasis." (CE. i, 625.) 

Thus by centuries of fraud, fear and force was the "house of God" 
filled from the highways and the hedges, the forests and the wattle 
villages, with Pagans "nominally converted to Christianity." Heathen 
superstitions veneered with the Pagan superstitions called Christian- 
ity, blended together for the further bestialization of the Faithful of 
Holy Church of the Christ, and the pall of the Dark Ages of Faith set- 
tled down over benighted, Church-ruled Christendom, that "civiliza- 
tion thoroughly saturated with Christianity," and "fully absorbed in 
the supernatural." Two holy characteristics of the Age of Faith, the 
grovelling fear of guilt and devout concern for the devil, are thus 
commented: "Superstition is abject and crouching, it is full of 
thoughts of guilt ; it distrusts God and dreads the power of evil" (CE. 
i, 555) ; and, with the pious Christians, "as among all savages, disease 
and death were commonly ascribed to evil spirits or witchcraft." 
(CE. xiv, 26.) So through the Ages of Faith ! 

Holy Church and Divine Christanity being now in full power and 
possession over mind and body of Christendom, it had free scope to 
bring forth fruits unto perfection of "Christian Civilization." 


"Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them/' Jesus. 

What Christianity did for [to] Civilization 

The first effects of a new, and particularly an official State Religion, 
are upon mind and morals, the state of culture or prevailing civiliz- 
ing conditions ; essentially, on the system of moral and intellectual 
education of the peoples subject to it. This is recognized by the 
Church: "As in many other respects, so for the work of education, the 
advent of Christianity is the most important epoch in the history of 
mankind." (CE. v, 299.) Alas, this is disastrously true, as the Church's 
own history demonstrates. Jesus Christ, says CE. 9 was the "Perfect 



Teacher"; "to His Apostles He gave the command, 'Going, therefore, 
teach ye all nations. 5 These words are the charter of the Christian 
Church as a teaching institution" (#>.) Here it got its Divine License 
to teach, and it taught. 

How effective was the Church as the Divinely instituted Pedagogue 
of Christendom, can be justly appreciated only through a knowledge 
of what kind of education, moral and mental, previously and at the 
time existed, and what educational system the Church inherited from 
the "heathens" when it assumed its sacred monopoly of teaching, and 
by a comparison between the pre-Christian and the Christian systems 
and results. By what the Church destroyed of existing systems, and 
by what is produced through its own, by these fruits of its zeal for 
Christian teaching must the success of its execution of its Divine Com- 
mission be known and judged. 

Christianity arose and finally prevailed in the Graco-Roman 
world, and there is exercised its 'Divine License as exclusive teacher of 
faith and morals and of secular education. Before the advent of Chris- 
tianity, the nations of the Pagan Empire were we are told "such 
as sit in darkness and the shadow of death" ; the "Perfect Teacher" 
came "to give light to them that sat in darkness and in the shadow 
of death" (Luke, i, 79 ; cf. Matt, iv, 16). A dismal picture is thus pre- 
sented, and for centuries was touched up with the darkest colors by 
Christian preachments, of the moral depravity if not intellectual 
benightedness of the poor heathens before the "Light of the World" 
was shed upon them from the Cross on Calvary. The Greeks and 
Romans knew naught of Moses and the Prophets, had never conned the 
Ten Commandments, and had never murdered any one "who heark- 
eneth not unto the priest," as commanded in Deut. xvii, 12. Deplor- 
able indeed must have been their state before the Divine Teacher 
undertook their enlightenment. The picture of their actual moral and 
intellectual plight we will scan as drawn by Christian scholars. Here is 
faintly a sketch of 


"The education of the Greeks exhibits a progressive development. . . . 
The ideal of Athenian education was the completely developed man. Beauty 
of mind and body, the cultivation of every inborn faculty and energy > har- 


mony between thought and life, decorum, temperance, and regularity 
such were the results aimed at in the home and in the school, in social in- 
tercourse, and in civic relations. 'We are lovers of the beautiful/ said Per- 
icles, 'yet simple in our tastes/ and we cultivate the mind without loss of 
manliness' (Thucydides, II, 40). . . . 

"The Greeks indeed laid stress on courage, temperance, and obedience 
to law; and if their theoretical disquisitions [or those of the Christians, 
for that matter] could be taken as fair accounts of their actual practice, it 
would be difficult to find, among the products of human thinking, a more 
exalted ideal. The essential weakness of their moral education was the fail- 
ure to provide any adequate sanction [e* g.> the fear of Hell and damna- 
tion] for the principles they formulated and the counsels they gave their 
youth. . . . The practice of religion, whether in public services or in 
household worship, exercised but little influence upon the formation of 
character. ... As to the future life, the Greeks believed in the immortal- 
ity of the soul; but this belief had little or no practical significance [as to 
them, virtue was its own reward], . . . 

"Thus the motive for virtuous action was found, not in respect for Di- 
vine law nor in the hope of eternal reward, but simply in the desire to 
temper in due proportion the elements of human nature. Virtue is not self- 
possession for the sake of duty, but, as Plato says, 'a kind of health and 
good habit of the soul/ while vice is 'a disease and deformity and sickness 
of it/ The just man 'will so regulate his own character as to be on good 
terms> with himself, and to set those three principles (reason, passion, and 
desire) in tune together, as if they were verily three chords of a harmony, a 
higher, a lower, and a middle, and whatever may lie between these; and 
after he has bound all three together and reduced the many elements of 
his nature to a real unity as a temperate and duly harmonized man, he will 
then at length proceed to do whatever he has to do* (Republic, IV, 44$). 
This conception of virtue as a self-balancing was closely bound up with 
that idea of personal worth which has already been mentioned as the cen- 
tral element in Greek life and education. . . . The aim of education, there- 
fore, is to develop knowledge of the GOOD." (CE. v, 296-7.) 

Saving their depraved want of respect for "Divine law'* (pro- 
claimed by priests), and their woful neglect to provide "adequate 
sanction" of "bribe of Heaven and threat of Hell' 3 (priest-devised), 
for inducement to their Nature-harmonized character, the godless 
Greeks did fairly well in "developing the knowledge of the good" and 
attaining the most "exalted ideal" outside of Jewish-Christian reve- 



lation to be found among mankind, of personal and civic virtue, due 
alone to their high "idea of personal worth," rather than to the 
revealed concept of humanity pre-damned, "conceived in sin and born 
in iniquity," crawling through this Vale of Tears as "vile worms of the 
dust," of Christian self-confession. But then, God in his inscrutable 
Wisdom had withheld his precious revelation of Total Depravity from 
the Greeks, knowing, probably, that they did not need it, and had 
bestowed it only on the obscure tribe of barbarian polygamous 
Hebrews, who eminently fitted the revelation. So it was not the Greeks' 
fault that they were no worse off, without the revelation, than were the 
Jews with it. We will come to the Christians anon. 

Though, thus, the "Sun of Righteousness" did not illumine the 
revelationless skies of Greek Culture, the most splendrous stars of 
intellect and soul which ever (before the Star of Bethlehem arose) 
shone down the vistas of Time, blazed in its zenith. The name of every 
star in that Pagan Greek galaxy is known to every intelligent person 
throughout Christendom today ; the light from these or those of them 
illuminates every page and every phase of Art, Literature and Science 
known today to the inestimable glory of man and boon of humanity. 
The living germ of some, the unsurpassed perfection of others, is the 
product of the intellect and the soul of the poor Pagan Greeks who 
had no Divine Revelation and were bereft of the priceless "benefit of 
Clergy" as a teaching institution. 

Let us gaze for a moment as through the telescope of Time and scan 
the brilliant luminaries of the heavens of Pagan Greek genius, un- 
dimmed then by the Light of the Cross. Beginning with those who were 
about contemporary in their appearance with post-exilic Hebrew 
revelation, say about i 600 B. c., we will name only those immortally 
known to every highschool student, skipping among the galaxies down 
to the time, about 400 A. D., when they were for a thousand years 
eclipsed by the Light of the Cross shining in the "Dark Ages" of 
Christian Faith. 

The Pagan Greeks, unfamiliar with the Hebrew revelation of the 
Divine Right of Kings (anointed by priests) to rule mankind, in- 
vented Democracy, the right of the people to rule themselves, a 
heresy recognized in the Declaration as a self-evident proposition, that 
all just powers of government are derived from the consent of the 


governed. News about Moses and his Divine laws not having penetrated 
into Pagan Greece, a scheme of purely human codes for human conduct 
was devised by the heathen Lawgivers, Draco, Solon, Lycurgus. The 
revealed Mosaic History of the Hebrews not being available as a 
model, the poor Pagan Greeks had to make shift with Herodotus, 
"Father of History," Thucydides, Xenophon, Strabo, Plutarch, Pau- 
sanius, Polybius, Claudius Ptolemy, Dion Cassius. The God-drafted 
plans of the Tabernacle in the Wilderness and of Solomon's Temple not 
being at hand to imitate, uninspired Greeks planned and built the 
Parthenon, the Erechtheum, the Prophylaea, the Temple of Diana of 
Ephesus, the Temple of Apollo at Corinth, the Serapion and the 
Museum, "Home of all the Muses," at Alexandria. The summit of 
human art in sculpture was reached in Pagan Greece, the Apollo 
Belvidere, the Venus de Milo, the Wingfed Victory, the Laocoon, the 
friezes of the Parthenon ; consummate masters of the "Old Masters" 
were the Pagans Phidias, Praxiteles, Callimachus, Scopas, Polyclitus, 
with the chisel ; Apelles, Zeuxis, Polygnotus, Parrhasius, Pausias, with 
the brush. Statesmen and military leaders unknown to Hebrew 
History, yet whose names are immortal, led the Pagan Greeks to 
greatness and glory : Themistocles, Pericles, Aristides the Just, Lycur- 
gus, Miltiades, Leonidas, Alexander the Great, who conquered the 
God-led Jews. Poor heathen orators, who never heard Jehovah speak 
from Sinai, nor the Christ on the Mount, their supreme eloquence has 
echoed down the ages : Demosthenes, Democrates, JEschines, Lysias, 

Literature and the Theatre were born in Pagan Greece; the 
"Classics" of Pagan thought and dramatic majesty came from the 
minds and pens of uninspired heathen who knew no line of the inspired 
**Law and Prophets" of the Hebrews, made semi-intelligible and 
sonorous only by the very free treatment of skilled translators into 
Elizabethan English ; they are the immortal and inimitable standards 
of literary form, style, culture, in every university, high school, play- 
house, and cultured home in Christendom today. For poetry : Homer, 
Hesiod, Pindar, Anacreon, Theocritus, the burning Sappho; for 
drama: JEschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes, besides the 
historians and orators named, the delightful old JSsop, the philos- 
ophers and scholars yet to name. The drama, tragedy, comedy, the 



chorus, melodrama ; the epic, the ode, the lyric, the elegy, poetic form 
and measure, the very words for all these things, pure Pagan Greek. 
Philosophy the love of Wisdom the highest reach of the uninspired 
human intellect into the mysteries, not of faith and godliness, but of 
mind and soul, in search of the first principles of being, the "ousia of 
the on" and for the Supreme Good, the noblest rules of human conduct 
and happiness: Thales, Anaximander, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, 
Heraclitus, Xenophanes, Leucippus, Democritus, Protagoras, Soc- 
rates, Plato of the Academy, Aristotle of the Lyceum, Epicurus, 
Pythagoras, Zeno the Stoic, Antisthenes the Cynic, whose lofty moral 
systems have exalted mankind ever since, and whose words and works 
have dominated civilization and made their names immortal, though 
none of them knew of Moses, the Christ, or the Apostles, although 
Heraclitus. invented the "Logos" which St. John worked up into the 
creative 'Word of God" for Christian consumption. 

Science, supremest handmaid of civilization, the true "God of this 
world," its splendid dawn was in Pagan Greece, unshackled by Genesis 
and Divine Mosaic revelation. Here Greek thought, undeterred by 
priestly ban and unaf righted by Popish Inquisition, sought to fathom 
the secrets of Creation and of Nature, to explain the Riddle of the 
Universe, to make the forces of Nature the obedient servitors of Man. 
Astronomy was born with Thales [640-546 B. c.], the first of the 
Seven Sages of Greece. Utterly ignorant of the Divine handiwork of 
the Six Days, and of universal creation out of universal Nothing, and 
not having travelled enough to verify the four corners of the flat earth, 
guarded by the Four Angels of the Corners, guardians of the Four 
Winds, he sought for the First Principle, the arch6 9 of Creation, at- 
tributing all matter to changes in atoms ; not knowing the revelation 
that the sun was set in a solid "firmament" arched over the flat earth, 
and somehow trundled across it daily to light Adam and his progeny, 
and had been stopped still for Joshua and turned backward ten degrees 
for Hezekiah, but fancying that it was governed by fixed natural law, 
by unaided power of mind he calculated and predicted the eclipse of 565 
B. c., and discovered the Solstices and Equinoxes ; he calculated so 
nearly the solar revolutions, that he corrected the calendar and divided 
the year into 365 days, which it still has ; he taught the Egyptians to 
measure the height of the Pyramids by triangulation from the shadow 


of a rod he set up near them, and invented several of the theorems 
adopted by Euclid. Anaximander (610-546 B.C.)? like his master 
ignorant of Mosaic astronomy, discovered and taught the obliquity of 
the ecliptic, due to the erratic behavior of the equator of the earth in 
swinging round the sun ; he approximated the sizes and distances of 
the planets not all set on the same solid plane ; he discovered the 
phases of the moon, and constructed the first astronomical globes ; he 
was the first to discard oral teaching, and commit the principles of 
natural science to writing. 

Pythagoras of Samos (c. 584 B. c.), was a universal genius; he 
coined the word "philosopher," according to Cicero ; made discoveries 
in music, which he conceived as a science based on mathematical prin- 
ciples, and fancied the "music of the spheres." As he hadn't read 
Genesis, he defiantly (through such ignorance) proclaimed that the 
earth was a globe revolving around the sun or central fire, and had 
inhabitable Antipodes, heathen notions which got several Christian 
gentlemen into more or less trouble some 2000 years later when they 
revived the idea. He speculated on eclipses as natural phenomena 
rather than special dispensations of Providence ; he disputed Moses on 
Geology by claiming that the earth-surface hadn't always been just so, 
but that the sea had once been land, the land sea ; that islands had once 
formed parts of continents ; that mountains were forever being washed 
down by rivers and new mountains thus formed ; that volcanoes were 
outlets for subterranean fires, rather than public entrances into Hell ; 
that fossils were the buried remains of ancient plants and animals 
turned into stone, rather than theological proofs of Noah's Mood 
embedded for confutation of Infidels in the Rock of Faith. 

Dembcritus (c. 460 B. c.), the "Laughing Philosopher," the most 
learned thinker of his day and renowned for all the moral virtues ; he 
wrote some 72 books on physics, mathematics, ethics, grammar ; to- 
tally unlearned in Bible science, he scouted the idea of Design in Na- 
ture, declaring it lapped in universal law ; he upheld belief in second- 
ary or physical causes, but not in a primary immaterial First Cause, 
declaring that by natural law could all the phenomena of the universe 
be accounted for; that there was no need of, no room for, super- 
natural interference or Divine Providence. He left immortal mark on 
the world of knowledge by his elaborated theory of atoms, or consti- 



tuents of matter too small to be cut or divided; boldly and logically 
he applied this theory to the gods themselves, holding that they were 
mere aggregates of material atoms (seemingly verified by the fact 
of eating the body of deity in wafers) only mightier and more 
powerful than men, and seemingly, to walk and talk, hate and kill, 
there must be something material about them. Modern chemistry, the 
most universal and useful of the sciences, is founded on modifications 
of the atomic theory of Democritus. 

Hippocrates (c. 460-c. 377 B. c.) is known as the "Father of Medi- 
cine." He was the first physician to differentiate diseases, and to as- 
cribe them to different causes, on the basis of accurate observation and 
common sense. His great axiom was : "To know is one thing ; merely to 
believe one knows is another. To know is science, but merely to believe 
one knows is ignorance." In his days all sickness and ailments were 
considered as inflicted directly by the gods ; the later revelation that it 
was all due to devils in the inner works of man was not then known. But 
the result was the same : all curing was the monopoly of the priests, 
the friends and favorites of the gods and possessors of all godly lore. 
As the only physicians, the priests had great revenues and a fine 
livelihood from the offerings made by patients who flocked for relief 
to the temples of JSsculapius, which filled the ancient world. Hippoc^ 
rates sought to separate medicine from religion, thus incurring the 
venomous attacks of the priests and pious quacks. Never having 
heard of "fig leaf poultices," or spittle to oust devils, "He laid down 
certain principles of science upon which modern medicine is built: 
1. There is no authority except facts; 2. Facts are obtained by 
accurate observation ; 3. Deductions are to be made only from facts." 
Not knowing the Christian art of casting out devils, the heathen 
"Hippocrates introduced a new system of treatment; he began by 
making a careful study of the patient's body, and having diagnosed 
the complaint, set about curing it by giving directions to the sufferer as 
to his diet and the routine of his daily life, leaving Nature largely to 
heal herself." As about ninety percent of all ills are such as would 
heal themselves if let alone, or if treated with simple hygienic means, 
and many cures are greatly aided by "faith" even in Pagan gods, the 
element of the miraculous is greatly discounted in the successes of the 
priests of JSsculapius, and possibly in those of Loreto and Lourdes. 


He had no real successor until Vesalius, the first real surgeon ; the 
Inquisition nearly got him because his anatomical researches disclosed 
that man had the same number of ribs as woman, not one less to repre- 
sent that taken for Eve ; and he disproved the Church's sacred science 
of the "Resurrection Bone." 

Aristotle (384-322 B. c.) the Stagarite, friend and tutor of Alex- 
ander the Great, besides being one of the greatest philosophers, was 
the foremost man of science of his day, and in his encyclopedic works 
laid the foundation of Natural science or physics, Natural History, 
meteorology or the phenomena of the heavens, animal anatomy, to all 
which he applied the processes of closest research and experiment and 
the principles of inductive reasoning. By reason of the limitations of 
his process, and over-dogmatism rather than experiment in some lines, 
he made many curious mistakes, which ham-strung the human rqjid 
for ages. One was the assertion that two objects of different weight, 
dropped from the same height to the earth, would strike the earth at 
different intervals of time, the heavier first ; when Galileo denied this 
theory and offered to disprove it by experiment, the pious Christians 
of Pisa scouted and scorned him ; when he ascended the Leaning Tower 
and dropped two iron balls, one of one pound weight, the other of one 
hundred, 'and both struck the ground at the same instant, they refused 
to accept the demonstration, and drove him out of the city ; so strong 
was the hold of even the errors of Pagan Aristotle on Christian 

Aristotle had not read the cosmic revelations of Moses, and was 
ignorant of the true history of Creation as revealed through him. He 
discovered sea shells and the fossil remains of marine animals on the 
tops of the mountains of Greece, and embedded far down from the 
surface in the sides of the mountain gorges ; he noted that the rocks lay 
in great layers or strata one above another, with different kinds of 
fossils in the several strata. In his Pagan imagination Aristotle com- 
mented on this : that if seashells were on the tops of mountains far from 
the sea, why, to get there the tops of the mountains must once have 
been in the bottom of the sea, the rocks formed under the sea, and 
the shells and other animal remains embedded in them must once have 
lived and died in the sea and there have been deposited in the mud of 
the bottom before it hardened into rock. If Aristotle had climbed Pike's 



Peak he would have found great beds of ocean coral in the rocks there ; 
sea shell-fish and sponges (which Aristotle himself first discovered 
to be animals) in the rocky walls of the Grand Canyon of the 

Theophrastus (c. 373-287 B. c.)? disciple and successor of Aris- 
totle as head of the Peripatetic School of philosophy ; his chief renown 
was as the first of the botanists, on which study he left some sixteen 
books ; for 1800 years after his death the science lay dormant ; not a 
single new discovery in that subject was made until after the close of 
the millennium of the Christian Ages of Faith. 

Aristarchus (c. 220-143 B. c.) was a celebrated astronomer of the 
new school at Alexandria. From his predecessors he knew that the 
earth revolved around the sun, and how the plane of the ecliptic was 
designed ; he calculated the inclination of earth's axis to the pole as the 
angle of 23% degrees, and thus verified the obliquity of the ecliptic, 
and explained the succession of the seasons. Aristarchus had not read 
Moses on the solid firmament and flat earth ; he clearly maintained that 
day and night were due to the spinning of the earth on its own axis 
every twenty-four hours ; his only extant work is "On the Sizes and 
Distances of the Sun and Moon," wherein by rigorous and elegant 
geometry and reasoning he reached results inaccurate only because of 
the imperfect state of knowledge in his time. By exquisite calculations 
he added 1/1623 of a day to Callipsus' estimate of 365% days for the 
length of the solar year ; and is said to have invented a hemispherical 

Hipparchus (c, 150 B. c.) made the first catalogue of stars, to the 
number of over 1,000 ; but his master achievement was the discovery 
and calculation of the "precession of the equinoxes" about 130 B. c* 
Without telescope or instruments, and with no Mosaic Manual on 
Astronomy to muddle his thought, by the powers of mathematical 
reasoning from observation he detected the complex movements of 
the earth, first in rapid rotation on its own axis, and a much slower 
circular and irregular movement around the region of the poles, which 
causes the equator to cut the plane of the ecliptic at a slightly dif- 
ferent point each year ; this he estimated at not more than fifty sec- 
onds of a degree each year, and that the forward revolution in "pre- 


cession" was completed in about 26,000 years. Such are the powers of 
the human mind untrammeled by revelation. 

Archimedes (287-212 B. c.), one of the most distinguished men of 
science who ever lived. He discovered the law of specific gravity, in con- 
nection with the fraudulent alloys put into Hiero's crown ; so excited 
was he when the thought struck him that, crying "Eureka" he jumped 
from his bath and ran home naked to proclaim the discovery. He 
discovered the laws governing the lever, and the principles of the pul- 
ley, and the famous endless water-screw used to this day in Egypt to 
raise water from the Nile for irrigation ; he was the first to determine 
the ratio of the diameter to the circumference of a circle, calculating 
"TTI" to be smaller than 3-1/7 and greater than 3-10/71, which is 
pretty close for a heathen not having the "Book of Numbers" before 
him. He made other discoveries and inventions too numerous to relate ; 
he disregarded his mechanical contrivances as beneath the dignity of 
pure science. 

Euclid (c. 300 B. c.) is too well known for his "Principles of Geome- 
try" to need more than mention. Erastosthenes (c. 276-194* B. c.) was 
the Librarian of the great Library of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, at 
Alexandria, containing some 700,000 volumes. He invented the im- 
aginary lines, parallels of longitude and latitude, which adorn all our 
globes and maps to this day. Not knowing the revelation that the earth 
is flat, he measured its circumference. Noticing that a pillar set up at 
Alexandria cast a certain shadow at noon on the summer solstice, 
while a similar pillar at Syene cast no shadow at that time, and was 
thus on the tropic ; he measured the distance between the two places, 
as 5,0.00 stadia, about 574 miles ; described a circle with a radius equal 
to the height of the pillar at Alexandria, found the length of the small 
arc formed on it by the shadow, which was 1/50 of the circle, and 
represented the arc of the earth's circle between Alexandria and 
Syene ; multiplying the distance by 50 he obtained 28,700 miles as the 
circumference of the earth ; a figure excessive due to mismeasurement, 
but a magnificent intellectual accomplishment. Erastosthenes was 
also the founder of scientific chronology, calculating the dates of the 
chief political and literary events back to the supposed time of the 
fall of Troy ; a date quite as uncertain as that of the later birth of 


Jesus Christ from which the monk Dennis the Little essayed to fix 
the subsequent chronology of Christian history. 

Hero of Alexandria (c. 130 B.C.) discovered the principle of the 
working-power of steam and devised the first steam-engines. In his 
Pneumatica he describes the seolipyle, which may be called a primitive 
steam reaction turbine ; he also mentions another device which may be 
described as the prototype of the pressure engine. (Encyc. Brit. 
xxi, 351-2.) 

Strabo (c. 63 B. C.-19 A. D.), the most famous early geographer 
and a noted historian ; he left a Geography of the world, as then known, 
in seventeen books, and made a map of the world ; travelled over much 
of it, and described what he saw. From a comparison of the shape 
of Vesuvius, not then a "burning mountain," with the active JStna, he 
forecast that it might some day become active, as it did in 79 A. D. to 
the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum, described by the Roman 
philosopher and natural historian, Pliny, who overlooked the Star of 
Bethlehem, and the earthquake and eclipse of Calvary. Strabo was 
ignorant of the cosmogony of Moses and the Flood of Noah; so he de- 
clared that the fossil shells which he discovered in rocks far inland from 
the sea proved that those rocks had been formed under the sea by silt 
brought down by rivers, in which living shell animals had become em- 
bedded. If Moses had revealed this interesting fact, much human per- 
secution and suffering would have been avoided. 

The principles of Evolution were discovered and taught by most 
of the ancient Greek philosophers above named and many others, all of 
whom were profoundly ignorant of the cosmogony of Genesis, and who 
"endeavored to substitute a natural explanation of the cosmos for 
the old myths." Anaximander (588-524 B. c.)s though he had not 
read Genesis, anticipated to the very word "slime" used in the True 
Bible as the material of animal and human creation ; "he introduced 
the idea of primordial terrestrial slime, a mixture of earth and water, 
from which, under the influence of the sun's heat, plants, animals, and 
human beings were directly produced." Empedocles of Agrigentum 
(495-435 B. c.) "may justly be called the father of the evolution 
idea. ... All organisms arose through the fortuitous play of the 
two great forces of Nature upon the four elements." Anaxagoras 
(500-428) "was the first to trace the origin of animals and plants 


to pre-existing germs in the air and ether." Aristotle (384-322 B. c.)> 
the first great naturalist, shows "in his four essays upon the parts, 
locomotion, generation, and vital principles of animals, that he fully 
understood adaptation in its modern sense ; ... he rightly conceived 
of life as the function of the organism, not as a separate principle ; 
. . . he develops the idea of purposive progresses in the development of 
bodily parts and functions." The doctrine is very substantially devel- 
oped by the Roman Lucretius, 99-55 B. c. (H. F. Osborn, From the 
Greeks to Darwin, pp. 50, et seq.) 

The vital germs of virtually every modern science had thus their 
origin and some notable development in the fertile minds of the Greek 
thinkers and in their great schools of thought, in the centuries which 
preceded the Advent of the "Perfect Teacher" and his divinely in- 
stituted successors in schoolcraft. If these profound researches into 
Nature had been included in the Curriculum of the Church, rather than 
fire and sword employed to extirpate them and all who ventured to 
pursue them, Holy Church would not have had the "Dark Ages of 
Faith" to record and apologize for. To what perfection of Civiliza- 
tion and Knowledge might Humanity have arrived in these 2000 
years wasted on the Supernatural, and the "Sacred Science of 
Christianity" ! 


The Greeks with their brilliant culture and educational system 
lay for the most part remote from the Holy See of God's Teacher- 
Church at Rome ; so it may be that the environment of the Teacher 
was really in a region which lay in darkness and the shadow of death, 
and thus its divine efforts were thwarted and rendered desultory. 
Thus it becomes important to know the degree of intellectual darkness 
and incapacity which whelmed the Empire of the West. The tale may 
best be told in the words of its Inspired Tutor. 

"In striking contrast with the Greek character, that of the Romans was 
practical, utilitarian, grave, austere. Their religion was serious, and it per- 
meated their whole life, hallowing all its relations. The family, especially, 
was far more sacred than in Sparta or Athens, and the position of woman 
as wife and mother more exalted and influential. . . . 



"The ideal at which the Roman aimed was neither harmony nor happi- 
ness, but the performance of duty and the maintenance of his rights. Yet 
this ideal was to be realized through service to the State. Deep as was the 
family feeling, it was always subordinate to devotion to the public weal. 
Tarents are dear/ said Cicero, 'and children and kindred, but all loves 
are bound up in the love of our common country* (De Officiis, I, 17). . . . 

"Thus the moral element predominated, and virtues of a practical sort 
were inculcated: first of all pietas, obedience to parents and to the gods; 
then prudence, fair dealing, courage, reverence, firmness, and earnestness. 
These qualities were to be developed, not by abstract or philosophical rea- 
soning, but through the imitation of worthy models and, as far as possible 
of living concrete examples. 'Vitae discimus, We learn for life,' said Sen- 
eca; and this sentence sums up the whole purpose of Roman education 
[in contrast to "We learn for heaven/' as we shall see the Christian Ideal 
of education]. 

"In the course of time, elementary schools (ludi) were opened, but they 
were conducted by private teachers and were supplementary to the home 
instruction. About the middle of the third century B. c. foreign influences 
began to make themselves felt. The works of the Greeks were translated 
into Latin, Greek teachers were introduced, and schools established in 
which the educational characteristics of the Greeks reappeared. Under the 
direction of the literatus and the grammatics education took on a literary 
character, while in the school of the rhetor the art of oratory was carefully 
cultivated." (CE. v, 298; see p. 358-9.) 


"Pagan education, as a whole, with its ideals, successes, and failures, 
has a profound significance. It was the product of the highest human wis- 
dom, speculative and practical, that the world has known [thus confess- 
edly, as the highest, higher than the Christian], It pursued in turn the 
ideals that appeal most strongly to the human mind. It engaged the thought 
of the greatest philosophers and the action of the wisest legislators. Art, 
science, and literature were placed at its service, and the mighty influence 
of the State was exerted in its behalf. In itself, therefore, and in its results, 
it shows how much and how little human reason can accomplish when it 
seeks no guidance higher than itself and strives for no purposes other than 
those which find, or might find, their realization in the present phase of 
existence" (CE. v, 298.) 

The splendors of the intellect and culture of Pagan Greece, its 
whole harmonious system of education, mental, moral and physical, 
which were the glory that was Greece, were transported thus to Rome 


and kindled anew there the torch of Reason which illumined and made 
splendid the power that was Rome. With clerical disparagement that 
all this intellectual and moral grandeur was accomplished by human 
reason alone with "no guidance higher than itself," that is, without 
the heaven-endowed tutorship of priestcraft, CE. yet confesses, that 
"Pagan education . . . was the product of the highest human wis- 
dom . . . that the world has ever known,'* pursuing "the ideals that 
appeal most strongly to the human mind." It was in literature and in 
law, in history, in government, and in the practical arts and sciences, 
rather than in pure science, that the Roman genius rose to its highest 
reaches. The undimmed lustre of the Roman mind yet casts its splen- 
dors over the world of thought ; Roman law, "the action of the wisest 
legislators," yet governs the actions of men and nations throughout 
the civilized world. A few illustrious names of universal renown must 
suffice to put into high relief the culture of Rome from the dawn of the 
Christian era till the pall of the Christian Ages of Faith fell over the 
Roman world. Augustus Caesar (not to mention Julius), Cicero, Cato, 
Seneca, the Plinys, Tacitus, Livy, 'Horace, Vergil, Lucretius, the 
Scipios, Gaius, Paulus, Papinian, Tribonius, Antoninius Pius, Mar- 
cus Aurelius ; the roster majr be mightily extended and every glorious 
name be known to every schoolboy. 

Thus was the Pagan Roman world intellectually and morally il- 
lumined when there befell 


under the tutelage of the vicars of the Perfect Teacher. The story 
again may be told by the accredited apologists who thus explain "The 
Aim of Christian Education," in response to the Divine Command. All 
education for practical objects of this life, for all "purposes which 
might find their realization in the present phase of existence," was 
piously and disdainfully rejected. For over a millennium, as will be 
soon admitted, Christian "education" was virtually limited to candi- 
dates for the priesthood and to the vain mummeries of monks ; with 
few and straggling exceptions no one but a churchman was taught a 
word : the simple proof is, that scarce one person in a thousand of the 
population of Christendom except priests, could read or write his 



name. The "education" of the Clergy will be known by its fruits, of 
which we shall have some tastes. Thus CE. discloses 


"To these Apostles He gave the command, 'Going therefore, teach ye 
all nations 1 (Matt, xxviii, 19) [a forged Mandate, as we have seen]. 
These [forged] words are the charter of the Christian Church as a teach- 
ing institution. While they refer directly to the doctrine of salvation, and 
therefore to the imparting of religious truth, they nevertheless, or rather 
by the very nature of that truth and its consequences for life, carry with 
them the obligation of insisting on certain characteristics which have a de- 
cisive bearing on all educational problems (p. 299-300). . . . 

"The Educational Work of the Church. Apart from the preaching of 
the Apostles, the earliest form of Christian instruction was that given to 
the catechumens in preparation for baptism. Its object was twofold: to 
impart a knowledge of Christian truth, and to train the candidate in the 
practice of religion. . . . Until the third century this mode of instruction 
was an important adjunct to the Apostolate; but in the fifth and sixth cen- 
turies it was gradually replaced by private instruction of the converts, 
and by the training given in other schools to those who had been baptised 
in infancy. The catechumenal schools, however, gave expression to the 
spirit which was to animate all subsequent Christian education: they were 
open to every one who accepted the Faith, and they united religious in- 
struction with moral discipline. The 'catechetical' schools, also under the 
bishop's supervision, prepared young clerics for the priesthood. The 
courses of study included philosophy and theology, and naturally took on 
an apologetic character in defense of Christian truth against the attacks* of 
pagan learning. . . . 

"Philosophy and literature were factors which had to be counted with 
as well as the educational system, which was still largely under pagan con- 
trol. . . . Fear of the corrupting influence of pagan literature had more 
and more alienated Christians from such studies. . . 

"[In the Middle Ages] education was provided for the clergy in the 
cathedral schools under the direct control of the bishop and for the laity 
in parochial schools to which all had access [but few availed thereof]. In 
the curriculum religion held the first place; other subjects were -few and 
elementary, comprising at best the trivium and the quadrivium. ... [I 
cannot forbear to add this] The history of education records no greater 
undertaking; for the task was not that of improving or perfecting, [the 
brilliant system of pagan education], but of creating [the dull schools of 
religious instruction] ; and had not the Church gone vigorously about her 
business, modern civilisation would have been retarded for centuries Y ! 1 


"The monasteries were the sole schools for teaching; they offered the 
only professional training ; they were the only universities of research; they 
alone served as publishing houses for the multiplication of books ; they were 
the only libraries for the preservation of learning; they produced the only 
scholars; they were the sole educational institutions of this period. . . . 

"Two other movements form the climax of the Church's activity during 
the Middle Ages. The development of Scholasticism meant the revival of 
Greek philosophy, and in particular that of Aristotle; but it also meant 
that philosophy was now to serve the cause of Christian truth. . . . Hav- 
ing used the subtleties of Greek thought to sharpen the student's mind, 
the Church thereupon presented to him her dogmas without the least fear 
of contradiction. . . . 

"The same synthetic spirit took concrete form in the universities. . . . 
In university teaching all the then known branches of science were rep- 
resented. . . . The university was thus,, in the educational sphere, the 
highest expression of that completeness which had all along characterized 
the teaching of the Church." (CE. v, 299-303, passim.) 

All these "universities were devoted for the most part to the de- 
velopment of theology." (CE. vii, 368; i, 264.) The "greatest" of 
these Christian universities was that of Paris, which originated about 
1211 ; legends of foundation of universities by Alfred, Charlemagne, 
and Theodosius II, are myths. The students were not boys, but mature 
men, many clergy. . . . Barbarous Latin of the universities and the 
wretched translations of Aristotle used in commentaries and lectures : 
the Scholastic method of teaching with its endless hair-splitting and 
disputations ; much time was spent in gaining very little knowledge or 
hardly any value," were the charges made by the new school of 
Humanists, headed by Erasmus, "Prince of Humanists, 5 * which de- 
stroyed the old Christian ideals of education. (CE. xv, 194.) 

The wonderful Middle Ages universities, so scorned by the Human- 
ists of the Renaissance, and so fondly cherished by the Church, are 
not to be confounded in thought with such modernistic institutions as 
Oxford, Cambridge, Columbia or Harvard (which all started on a 
purely "Christian" standard). A revealing pen-sketch of them all, 
based on that of Paris, is drawn by Prof. James Harvey Robinson : 
"There were no university buildings, and in Paris the lectures were 
given in the Latin Quarter, in Straw Street, so called from the straw 
strewn on the floors of the hired rooms where the lecturer explained the 
text-book [a handwritten manuscript], with the students squatting 



on the floor before him. There were no laboratories, for there was no 
experimentation. All that was required was a copy of the text-book. 
This the lecturer explained sentence by sentence, and the students 
listened and sometimes took notes. 

"The most striking peculiarity of the instruction of the medieval 
university was the supreme deference paid to Aristotle. . . . Aris- 
totle was, of course, a pagan. He was uncertain whether the soul 
existed after death; he had never heard of the Bible and knew nothing 
of the salvation of man through Christ. One would suppose that he 
would have been rejected with horror by the ardent Christian believers 
of the Middle Ages. But the teachers of the thirteenth century were 
fascinated by his logic and astonished at his learning. . . . He was 
called 'The Philosopher' ; and so fully were scholars convinced that it 
had pleased God to permit Aristotle to say the last word upon each 
and every branch of knowledge that they humbly accepted him, along 
with the Bible, the Church Fathers, and the canon and Roman law, 
as one of the unquestionable authorities which together formed a com- 
plete and final guide for humanity in conduct and in every branch 
of science. . . . No attention was given to the great subject of his- 
tory in the medieval universities, nor was Greek taught." (Robinson, 
The Ordeal of Civilization, pp. 207-208.) 

The school of Erasmus and the other great Humanists who pre- 
ceded and followed him brought the Renaissance to its fullness of 
glory in emancipating the mind from the fetters of the Dark Ages 
of Faith, and destroyed the rotten fruits of a millennium of "Christian 
education." Thereupon, says CE., painfully confessing the truth, with 
reservations, "once the schools were secularized, they fell rapidly under 
influences which transformed ideals 9 systems and methods. Philosophy 
detached from theology, formulated new theories of life #nd its values, 
that moved, at first slowly and then more rapidly, away from the 
positive teachings of Christianity, Science in turn cast off its allegiance 
to philosophy and finally proclaimed itself the only sort of knowl- 
edge worth seeking. . . . 

"During three centuries past, the main endeavor outside the Catho- 
lic Church has been to establish education on a purely naturalistic 
basis, whether this be aesthetic culture or scientific knowledge, individ- 
ual perfection or social service. . . . The Catholic Church has been 


obliged to carry on ... the struggle in behalf of those truths on 
which Christianity is founded ; and her educational work during the 
modern period may be described in general terms as the steadfast main- 
tenance of the union between the natural and the supernatural. . . . 
It is specially the parochial school that has served in recent times 
as an essential factor in the work of religion. . . . Sound moral in- 
struction is impossible apart from religious education. . . . Catholic 
parents are bound in conscience to provide for the education of their 
children, either at home or in schools of the right sort." (CE. v, 295- 
304, passim.) "Parochial schools . . . aimed at -fostering vocations 
to the priesthood." (CE. xiii, 555.) 

The high Christian educational ideal of fettering Reason with 
Faith, and the underlying objective of all Church teaching, is again 
strongly insisted upon by our spokesman for Christian education : 

"The Christian Church, by virtue of her Divine charter, 'Going, teach 
ye all nations,' is essentially a teaching organization. . . . Truths which 
are not of their nature spiritual, truths of science, or history, matters of 
culture, in a word, profane learning these do not belong intrinsically to 
the progamme of the Church's teaching. Nevertheless, they enter into her 
work by force of circumstances, when, namely, the Christian youth cannot 
attain a knowledge of them without incurring a grave danger to faith or 
morals. . . . She assumes [therefore, not divinely ordained to her, but 
self-erogated] the task of teaching the secular branches in such a way 
that religion is the centralising, unifying, and vitalizing force in the edu- 
cational process/* (CE. xiii, 555.) 


"Apart from Eeligion the observance of the Moral Law is impossible." 
(CE. x, 559,) 

"The wonderful efficacy displayed by the religion of Christ in purify- 
ing the morals of Europe has no parallel." (CE. iii, 34.) 

"Her holiness appears in the fruits which she brings forth." (CE. iii, 

The above gems of pious self-gratulation are culled from the ple- 
thoric treasure-chest of like paste jewels of ecclesiastical false pre- 
tense, and are set in high relief as tribute to the presumptuous genius 
of Pharisaism. A few more out of many may be displayed as a foil 



to what follows : "Sound moral instruction is impossible apart from re- 
ligious education" (CE. v, 304), though this seems to be discounted 
by this formal admission of the entire efficacy of purely secular ethic 
of Plato and the Pagans : "All moral conduct may be summed up in 
the rule : Avoid evil and do good" (CE. v, 28) ; and by this self-evident 
truth: "Material prosperity and a high degree of civilization may be 
found where the Church does not exist." (CE. iii, 760.) Whether 
either of these highly beneficent conditions have been found where the 
Church in plenitude of power and pride did exist, will soon be dis- 
closed. However, these disproofs to the contrary, "The Church has 
ever affirmed that the beliefs of Theism and morality are essentially 
connected, and that apart from religion the observance of the moral 
law is impossible." (CE. x, 559.) 

Yet we have just read from the teeming pages of CE. the glowing 
tributes to the morally "exalted ideals" of the Pagan Greeks, and 
that with the Pagan Romans "the moral element predominated" ; that 
"Pagan education, as a whole, was the product of the highest human 
wisdom that the world has ever known," and withal without the 
Light of the Cross to illumine the Pagan mind and conscience. Indeed, 
in the next sentences after the last above, CE. 9 waxing philosophical, 
belies fully its "Morality Lie" thesis, that "apart from religion the ob- 
servance of the moral law is impossible," by this explicit admission of 
the natural source and origin of Morality : "The Church admits that 
the moral law is Jcnowable to reason : for the due regulation of our free 
actions, in which morality consists, is simply their right ordering 
with a view to the perfecting of our rational nature. . . . The Greeks 
of classical times were in moral questions influenced rather by non- 
religious conceptions such as that of natural shame than the fear of 
the gods; while one great religious system, namely Buddhism, ex- 
plicitly taught the entire independence of the moral code from any 
belief in God." (CE. x, 559.) We shall wonder, as we read the Chris- 
tian record, how far the "beliefs of Theism" make for morality in 
higher or more wholesome degree than "the entire independence of 
the moral code from any belief in God." Morals is from mores, "cus- 
tom"; it is social, not supernatural in origin; humanly conventional, 
not of divine imposition and sanction. The "morals," customs, of an 
age or a people depend always on what is then regarded as socially 


convenient, on the character of education and example given by their 
preceptors and their environment. 

The foregoing clerical admissions of the purely natural origin and 
sanctions of morals, of the Moral Law, are perfectly valid and con- 
vincing; a more formal and incontrovertible statement of the fact 
and the principle, taken from a special study of the subject, under 
the title "Ethics" in CE. 9 by a Jesuit Professor of Moral Philosophy, 
is added for the complete refutation of the Christian "Morality Lie" : 

"Morality, or sum of prescriptions which govern moral conduct. . . . 
Ethics takes its origin from the empirical fact that certain general prin- 
ciples and concepts of the moral order are common to all peoples at all 
times. ... It is a universally recognised principle that we should not do 
to others what we would not wish them to do to us. . . . The general prac- 
tical judgments and principles : 'Do good and avoid evil/ 'Lead a life accord- 
ing to reason,' etc., from which all the Commandments of the Decalogue 
are derived, are the basis of the natural law, of which St. Paul (Rom. ii, 
14) says, it is written in the hearts of all men, . . . made known to all men 
by nature herself." (CE. v, 557, 562.) 

It is because only of the nauseating persistence of the dingdonging 
of this pestilent "Christian Morality Lie," by priest, parson and 
press, that the loathsome record of the unparalleled moral corruption 
of the Church and of Christendom under the Church, is here in very 
summary and imperfect manner displayed in refutation of this im- 
mense False Pretense. It rings false from every pulpit and Christian 
apologist today as it has through all the centuries of Creed and Crime 
of the Church. Here in thumbnail sketch is the summary of Christian 
results after a millennium of undisputed moral sway: "The Church 
was the guide of the Western nations from the close of the seventh 
century to the beginning of the sixteenth" (CE. vii, 370) ; and for 
result: "At the beginning of the Reformation, the condition of the 
clergy, and consequently of the people, was a very sad one. . . The 
unfortunate state of the clergy, their corrupt morals." (CE. vii, 387.) 
"The Lateran was spoken of as a brothel, and the moral corruption 
of Rome became the subject of general odium." (CE. viii, 426.) That 
there may be no mistake about the insistent pretense of the Church to 
teach and impose morality, "The Roman Pontiffs have always, as 
their office demands, guarded the Christian faith and morals," as 



admitted by the Apostolic Letter of His Holiness Pius IX, dated 
June 29, 1868, by which he summoned the celebrated Vatican Council 
which decreed Papal Infallibility in all matters of faith and morals. 
(CE. i, 176.) Therefore it was, that "the Church of the Middle Ages, 
having now attained to power, continued through her priests to prop- 
agate the Gospel. ... In the wake of religion follows her insepa- 
rable companion, morality." (CE. xii, 418.) We shall now see the 
Church at work for morality and the moral "fruits" of Christianity 
through the Dark Ages of Faith. "Those were indeed golden days 
for the ecclesiastical profession, since the credulity of men reached 
a height which seemed to insure to the clergy a long and universal 
dominion, until the prospects of the Church were suddenly darkened, 
and human reason began to rebel . . . with the rise of that secular 
and skeptical spirit to which European civilization owes its origin," 
as Buckle says and demonstrates and I will briefly sketch, after first 
letting CE. reveal facts which are the harvest-fruits of Christian 

How, then, are we surprised to read the official confession, that 
these same Middle Ages were, of all human epochs, "an age of 
terrible corruption and social decadence"? (CE. i, 318.) Surely the 
good cleric who penned these shaming words was- a moral dyspeptic 
or must have developed a pessimistic in-growing conscience. We turn 
the pages of this ponderous Apology for the Faith to find the records 
of Church history giving the lie to this scandalous and disgraceful 
confession. There are fifteen great quarto tomes of CE., of over 700 
double-column pages each ; and surely if this confession is mistaken 
or untrue, the glorious facts of Church morality, its ever-radiant and 
redolent "sweetness and light," which cannot be hid, will be made 
manifest for the confusion of those who might mock over this con- 
fession. The following paragraphs are the gleanings from just one, 
the first, of these fifteen volumes, recording the sacred history of the 
Church, in which "her holiness appears in the fruits which she brings 
forth," as therein preserved, and unparalleled "in purifying the morals 
of Europe" for fifteen centuries and more under her undisputed moral 
sway. In this one sample volume is the true assay of the "fruits" con- 
served in them all ; a typical cross-section of Church history* Multiply 
by fifteen the product of these revelations of the "fruits which she 


brings f orth," and even the most unregenerate critic of Christianity 
must agree with CE, that "the wonderful efficacy of the religion of 
Christ in purifying the morals of Europe has no parallel" in any reli- 
gion or history known to mankind. The following passages are word 
for word from Volume I (unless otherwise indicated), of the 
Catholic Encyclopedia, arranged roughly in chronological order, 
through part only of one letter of the Alphabet. They give thus a sort 
of segmentary cross-cut and bird's-eye-view of the moral and social 
conditions of Christendom through the centuries, with quite imperfect 
glimpses of that sweet charity one to another which distinguishes those 
who love their enemies in the fashion of King Richard to his brother: 
"For I do love my brother Clarence so, That I would see his sweet soul 
In the bosom of good old Abraham !" 

Countless instances of Christian "morality" we have already seen 
in the myriad holy forgeries of the Church throughout fifteen cen- 
turies ; again are confessed "the many apocryphal [forged] writings 
in the first five centuries of the Christian era." (CE. i, 132.) Whoever 
would forge for Christ's sake or his own profit would as readily com- 
mit any other crime for the same ends, as we shall see to the limit of 
abhorrence. But the predilect perversity of the Christians clerical and 
lay, was the "lusts of the flesh," that distinctive "crime" so proscribed 
and so practiced by the expounders, of "Christian virtue," and the 
"inseparable companion" of the most religious. That "sex-scandals" 
were rampant in the earliest days of the several infant Churches is 
manifest in quite all of the second-century Epistles of the New Testa- 
ment, as any one may read unto edification. The Agape, or Christian 
"love feast" was all its name implies ; it was "a form of ancient Pagan 
funeral feast. From the fourth century onward . . . the agape gave 
rise to flagrant and intolerable abuses'* (i, 202). From the first cen- 
tury, "the Agapetas were virgins who consecrated themselves to God 
with a vow of chastity and associated with laymen, who like themselves 
had taken a vow of chastity. ... It resulted in abuses and scandals. 
. . . , St. Jerome [about 400] asked indignantly, *Why was this pest 
of Agapetos introduced into the Church?* St. Cyprian shows that 
abuses of this kind developed in Africa and the East. The Council of 
Ancyra, in 314, forbade virgins consecrated to God to thus live with 
men as sisters. This did not correct the practice entirely, for St. Je- 



rome arraigns Syrian monks for living in cities with Christian virgins. 
These Agapetce are sometimes confounded with the Subintroducta, 
or women who lived with clerics without marriage." (202.) 

St. Cyprian, On the State of the Church, just before the Decian 
persecution (c. 250), admits: "There was no true devotion in the 
priests. . . . That the simple were deluded, and the brethren cir- 
cumvented by craft and fraud. That great numbers of the bishops 
. . . were eager only to heap up money, to seize people's lands by 
treachery and fraud, and to increase their stock by exhorbitant 
usury." (Quoted by Middleton, Free Inquiry, Int. Disc. Ixvii-ix.) 

"Solicitation, in canon law, is the crime of making use of the Sacra- 
ment of Penance for the purpose of drawing others into sins of lust. 
Numerous popes have denounced this crime vehemently, and decreed 
punishments for its commission ... in connection with the Confes- 
sional, during or before" (xiv, 134). "The crime of abduction was, 
doubtless, extremely rare among the early Christians. In the fourth 
century, when men grew bolder, the number of wife-captors became 
exceedingly numerous. To check this" a long line of Church enact- 
ments listed, down to the Council of Trent (1500's) was futile. (CE. 
i, 33.) While some of the following descriptions are applied to particu- 
lar time and place, yet as is evident from the content and ensemble, 
like conditions existed "always and everywhere" through the Middle 
Ages, that delectable "civilization thoroughly saturated with Chris- 
tianity." Thus "even in the fourth century, St. John Chrysostom tes- 
tifies to the decline of fervor in the Christian family, and contends 
that it is no longer possible for children to obtain proper religious 
and moral training in their own homes" (555), already so debased was 

Loving Christian differences of opinion, enhanced by corporal 
methods of seeking each to force the other to the same opinion, were 
so ubiquitous and universal that birth was given to a special and deadly 
new species of human hatred and a distinctive name coined for it: 
Odium Theologicum Theological Hatred, and the maxim: "Hell 
hath no fury like an offended Saint." The Father of Church History, 
Bishop Eusebius, has scathing passages, and he refuses, "to record 
the dissensions and follies which they exercised against each other be- 
fore the (Diocletian) persecution." (Hist. Eccles. Bk. VIII, chap, 2.) 


And in Chapter 12, entitled "The Prelates of the Church," Eusebius 
wordily and in figured speech thus in substance describes them : "the 
different heads of the churches, who from being shepherds of the 
reasonable flocks of Christ, . . were condemned by divine justice as 
unworthy of such a charge ; . . . moreover, the ambitious aspiring 
of many to office, and the injudicious and unlawful ordinations that 
took place, the divisions among the confessors themselves, the great 
schisms and difficulties industriously fomented by the factious, . . . 
heaping up affliction upon affliction : all this I have resolved to pass 
by," as too shameful to be preserved in detail. Speaking of the Church 
historian Socrates, who died about 400 : "Living as he did in an age 
of bitter polemics, he strove to avoid the animosities and hatreds en- 
gendered by theological differences." (CE. xiv, 119.) 

We recall the embittered and bloody strifes which waged from 
the early days of the fourth century between the partizans of Arius, 
who denied the Divinity of Jesus Christ and consequently the existence 
of the Blessed Trinity or Three-in-One Godhead, and the "orthodox" 
or "right-thinking" faction which vociferated that Father and Son 
were of the same eternal age and "homoousion" or "of the same sub- 
stance," of which puzzle it is assured : "It is manifest that a dogma 
so mysterious presupposes a divine revelation." (CE. ix, 309.) But 
that "divine revelation" was let into the clerical mind through the 
efficacious grace of clubs, stones and knives, by force of fraud and 
deviltry, as thus witnessed : "The great definition of the Homoousion, 
promulgated at Nicsea in 325, so far from putting an end to further 
discussion, became rather the occasion of keener debate and for still 
more distressing confusion of statement in the formulation of theories 
on the relationship of Our Lord to His Father. [Other angry Councils 
with the Holy Ghost were held on the "theory"] at Ariminum for the 
West, and at Seleucia for the East, in 359. At both Councils, as the 
result of dishonest intrigue and an unscrupulous use of intimidation, 
. . * the Homoousion was given up and the Son was declared to be 
merely similar to no longer identical in substance with the Father. 
St. Jerome's characterization of the issue still affords the best com- 
mentary: 'The whole world groaned in wonderment to find itself 
Arian.*" (CE. i, 79.) Thus are divine revelations made manifest! 
The Christian trait of love for enemies is exemplified: "The sudden 



death of Arius [attributed to poison] was looked upon by contem- 
porary Catholics as an answer to the prayers of the good bishop," 
(CE. i, 285.) All the "new nations'* except the Franks, converted 
under Clovis, were "Arian heretics"; and for some four centuries 
maybe a million throats were cut in the name of One God or Three, 
before the "divine revelation" of Three-in-One won out. 

"The accession of Constantine found the African Church rent by 
controversies and heresies: Catholics and Donatists contended not 
only in a wordy warfare, but also in a violent and sanguinary way. 
. . . Attempts at reconciliation, at the suggestion of the Emperor 
Constantius, only widened the breach, and led to armed repression, 
an ever-growing discontent, and an enmity that became more and 
more embittered. . . . One act of violence followed another and begot 
new conflicts. . . . Even in such condition of peril [the bitter re- 
prisals of the Arian Vandals which filled the fifth century], the Chris- 
tians of Africa were far from showing those virtues which might be 
looked for in a time of persecution. . . . Crimes of all kinds made 
Africa one of the most wretched provinces in the world. Nor had the 
Vandals escaped the effects of this moral corruption, which slowly de- 
stroyed their power and eventually effected their ruin. . . . While 
one part of the episcopate wasted its time and energies in fruitless 
theological discussions, others failed of their duty. The last forty 
years of the seventh century witnessed the gradual fall of the frag- 
ments of Byzantine Africa into the hands of the Arabs. ... In this 
overwhelming disaster the African Church was blotted out." (CE. i, 
191-2.) God failed to protect his Holy own! 

If prelates and priests, the shepherds of the flocks, wallowed in 
moral defilement, judge of the state of the witless sheep of the heavenly 
fold. "Valence, the central see of the Kingdom, had been scandalized 
by the dissolute Bishop Maximus, and the see in consequence had 
been vacant for fifty years," till 486. (616.) "Pope St. Agapetus I 
(535536) was the son of a Roman priest slain during the riots in the 
days of Pope Symmachus. His first official act was to burn in the pres- 
ence of the assembled clergy the anathema which Boniface II had pro- 
pounded against the latter's rival Dioscurus" (202). St. Angilbert, 
Abbott, "at this period [about 790] was leading a very worldly life. 
. . . Angilbert undoubtedly had an intrigue with Charlemagne's un- 


married daughter Bertha, and became by her the father of two chil- 
dren" (490). "On the death of Pope Formosus (896) there began for 
the papacy a time of the deepest humiliation, such as it has never ex- 
perienced before or since. After the successor of Formosus, Boniface 
VI, had ruled only fifteen days, Stephen VI (properly, VII), was 
raised to the Papal Chair. In his blind rage, Stephen not only abused 
the memory of Formosus but also treated his body with indignity. 
Stephen was strangled in prison in the summer of 897, and the six 
following popes (to 904) owed their elevation to the struggles of the 
political parties. Christophorus, the last of them, was overthrown by 
Sergius III (904-911)." (ii, 147.) Pope Agapetus II (946-956), 
"for ten years, during what has been termed the period of deepest 
humiliation for the papacy. . . . He laboured incessantly to restore 
the decadent discipline in churches and cloisters ; and in quieting dis- 
turbances in the metropolitan see of Rheims ; and at putting an end to 
anarchy in Italy" (i, 203). Such periods of "deepest humiliation to the 
papacy" were quite recurrent : "The Popes Benedict from the fourth 
to the ninth inclusive belong to the darkest period of papal history 
(900-1048) . . . Benedict VI was thrown into prison by the anti- 
pope Boniface VII, and strangled by his orders, in 974. Benedict VH 
was a layman and became pope by force, and drove out Boniface VII ; 
died 983. . . . Pope Benedict IX had long caused scandal to the 
Church by his disorderly life. His immediate successor, Pope Gregory 
VI (1044-46) had persuaded Benedict IX to resign the Chair of 
Peter, and to do so bestowed valuable possessions on him" (31). 

"There can be no doubt that at this period (800's) the law of 
celibacy was ill observed by priests" (507). St. Arialdo was 'martyred 
at Milan in 1065, for his attempt to reform the simoniacal and im- 
moral clergy of that city. . . . For inveighing against abuses he was 
excommunicated by the bishop" (707). Pope Alexander II (1061-73) 
was a leader in "that great agitation against simony and clerical 
incontinence. ... A faction elected Honorius II as pope public 
opinion clamoring for reform. Alexander was omnipresent, through 
his legates, punishing simoniacal bishops and incontinent clergy" 
(286). "The Church at that time (1072) was torn by the schisms of 
anti-popes" (541). "The desperate moral barbarism of the age." 
(vii, 229.) Pope Anacletus II (1130-38) had before his election sup- 



ported the popes in their fifty years' war for reform. If we can believe 
his enemies, he disgraced his office by gross immorality and by his 
greed in the accumulation of lucre. There* can be no doubt that he 
determined to buy or force his way into the Papal Chair. . . . On the 
death of Honorius, two popes, Anacletus II and Innocent II were 
elected and consecrated on the same day, by the factions in the Sacred 
College. . . . When Anacletus died, another anti-pope, Victor IV, 
was elected by one faction" (447). 

The "glorious thirteenth century," which the Faithful for some 
unfathomable reason exalt proudly above all the others of the Dark 
Ages of Faith, was ushered in with the murderous Holy Inquisition 
and the unholy crusade against the Albigenses, tens of thousands of 
whom were butchered and the fairest half of France laid desolate. The 
motive for this unprecedented butchery and devastation is naively 
confessed to be "their wealth . . . their contempt for the Catholic 
clergy, caused by the ignorance and the worldly, too frequently scan- 
dalous lives of the latter" (268). "With the zeal of an apostle St. 
Anthony [d. 1231] undertook to reform the morality of his time; 
. . . enormous scandals were repaired" (557). "The barons of the 
Campagna fought with each other and with the Pope and, issuing 
from their castles, raided the country in every direction, and even 
robbed the pilgrims on their way to the tombs of the Apostles. . . . 
William I took captive many wealthy Greeks, the greater number of 
whom he sold into slavery" (157). "A period of decline followed after 
the middle of the thirteenth century, when war and rapine did much 
injury . . . suffered again in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 
from the prevailing social disturbances" (145). "Pope Alexander IV 
(1254-61) was easily led away by the whisperings of flatterers, and 
inclined to listen to the wicked suggestions of avaricious persons. 
... He continued Innocent IV's policy of a war of extermination 
against the progeny of Frederick II. ... The pecuniary assistance 
these measures brought him was dearly bought by the embitterment 
of the English clergy and people against the Holy See. . . . The 
unity of Christendom was a thing of the past" (288). About 1300, 
"all looked forward to the time when the religious orders, whose laxity 
had been occasioned in great measure by the general looseness of the 
times, would be restored to their former discipline" (484). 


Under Pope Alexander V (1409-1410) "The Great Schism (1378- 
1417) rent the Church. As cardinal he had sanctioned the agreement 
of the rival Colleges of Cardinals to join in a common effort for unity. 
He thus incurred the displeasure of Gregory XII [who deposed him]. 
At the Council of Pisa (1409) he preached the opening sermon, a 
scathing condemnation of the rival popes, and presided at the delib- 
erations of the theologians who declared those popes heretics and 
schismatics ... in the riven Catholic world. . . . His legitimacy 
was soon questioned, and the world was chagrined to find that instead 
of two popes it now had three. . . . Whether or not Alexander was 
a true pope is a question still discussed" (288-9). 

Speaking of "moral" conditions in the Holy City and prevailing 
in the age, CE. thus summarizes the "sweetness and light" of Chris- 
tendom in the time of His Holiness Sixtus IV (died 1484) : "His 
dominating passion was nepotism, heaping riches and favors on his 
unworthy relatives. His nephew, the Cardinal Rafael Riario, plotted to 
overthrow the Medici; the pope was cognizant of the plot, though 
probably not of the intention to assassinate, and even laid Florence 
under an interdict because it rose in fury against the conspirators and 
brutal murderers of Giuliano dei Medici. Henceforth, until the Refor- 
mation, the secular interests of the papacy were of paramount im- 
portance. The attitude of Sixtus towards the conspiracy of the Pazzi, 
his wars and treachery, his promotion to the highest offices in the 
Church of such men as ... are blots upon his career. Nevertheless, 
there is a praiseworthy side to his pontificate. He took measures to 
suppress abuses in the Inquisition, vigorously opposed the Waldenses, 
and annulled the decrees of the Council of Constance . . . Under him 
Rome became once more habitable, and he did much to improve the 
sanitary conditions of the city." (CE. xiv, 32, 33.) 

Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503) was so notoriously infamous and 
his history is so large and so well known, with his six bastards, includ- 
ing Cesare and Lucrezia Borgia, and his numerous Vatican mistresses 
and dissolute Papal Court, under whose regime again "the Vatican 
was a brothel," that he is simply mentioned in his order. When one of 
his bastard sons "was fished out of the Tiber with his throat cut . . . 
that it was a warning from Heaven to repent, no one felt more keenly 
than the Pope himself. He spoke of resigning; and proclaimed his 



determination to set about that reform of the Church 'in Head and 
members 9 for which the world had so long been clamoring"; but his 
grief was assuaged by the attentions of his lady loves, notably pretty 
Guilia Farnese, niece of the Cardinal, and whose picture as an angel 
now adorns one of the great frescos of the Vatican. "Long ago Leo 
the Great (440-461) declared, 'the dignity of Peter suffers no dim- 
inution even in an unworthy successor. 5 " (289, 294, passim.) Maybe 
so; but the question simply is, "the unparalleled purification of 
morals" produced by the religion of Christ! 

About this juncture, and after a thousand years of such conditions 
in the Church and the Heads of the Church, popes, prelates, priests, 
and monks, and rife among the degraded people, the protests of 
Christendom swelling steadily for several centuries broke into the 
Protestant Reformation by force and arms. A thumbnail sketch of 
the culmination and the causes leading up to it throughout the Middle 
Age "civilization thoroughly saturated with Christianity," is drawn 
by CE. in two paragraphs here quoted : 

"At the time of Gregory VIFs elevation to the papacy (1073-85), 
the Christian world was in a deplorable condition. During the desolat- 
ing period of transition the terrible period of warfare and rapine, 
violence, and corruption in high places, which followed immediately 
upon the dissolution of the Carlovingian Empire [in the 800's], a 
period when society in Europe seemed doomed to destruction and ruin 
the Church had not been able to escape from the general debasement 
[to which it had so signally contributed, if not caused]. The tenth 
century, the saddest perhaps, in Christian annals, is characterized by 
the vivid remark of [Cardinal] Baronius that Christ was as asleep 
in the vessel of the Church. At the time of Leo IX's election in 1049, 
according to the testimony of St. Bruno, Bishop of Segni, 'the whole 
world lay in wickedness, holiness had disappeared, justice had perished, 
and truth had been buried; Simon Magus* was lording it over the 
Church, whose bishops were given to luxury and fornication.* St. Peter 
Damien, the fiercest censor of his age, unrolls a frightful picture of 
the decay of clerical morality in the lurid pages of his 'Book of 
Gomorrah/ . . . Writing in 1075, Gregory himself laments the un- 
happy state of the Church. 'The Eastern Church has fallen away from 
the Faith and is now assailed on every side by infidels. Wherever I 


turn my eyes to the west, to the north, to the south, I find every- 
where bishops who have obtained their office in an irregular way, whose 
lives and conversations are strangely at variance with their sacred 
calling; who go through their duties not for the love of Christ but 
from motives of worldly gain. And those among whom I live are worse 
than Jews or Pagans.' . . . Gregory made every effort to stamp out 
of the Church the two consuming evils of the age, simony and clerical 
incontinency. . . . Gregory began his great work of purifying the 
Church by a reformation of the clergy. In 1074 he enacted the follow- 
ing decrees [a series aimed at the two universal vices named]. But 
they met with vigorous resistance, . . . called forth a most violent 
storm of opposition throughout Italy, Germany, and France. And 
the reason for this opposition on the part of the vast throng of im- 
moral and simoniacal clerics is not far to seek." (CE. vi, 793-4.) 
Still, nearly five centuries later : 

"Churchmen in high places were constantly unmindful of truth, 
justice, purity, self-denial ; many had lost all sense of Christian ideals ; 
not a few were deeply stained by Pagan [?] vices. . . . The earlier 
years of JEneas Sylvius [Pope Pius II, 145864], the whole career of 
Rodrigo Borgia (Alexander VI), the life of Farnese, afterwards 
Paul III, until he was compelled to reform himself as well as the Curia, 
... all with disregard for the most elementary virtues. Julius II 
fought and intrigued like a mere secular prince ; Leo X, although cer- 
tainly not an unbeliever [it was His Holiness who framed the famous 
"witty epigram: *What profit has not that Fable of Christ brought 
us* " ; Encyc. Brit., 14th Ed. xix, 217] was frivolous in the extreme ; 
Clement VII drew on himself the contempt as well as hatred of all 
who had dealings with him, by his crooked ways and cowardly subter- 
fuges which led to the taking and pillage of Rome. Now, it is not unfair, 
to trace in these popes, as in their advisers, a certain common type, 
the pattern of which was Cesare Borgia, sometime cardinal, but always 
in mind and action a condottiere [bandit], while its philosopher was) 
Machiavelli. We may express it in the words of Villari as a 'prodigious 
intellectual activity accompanied by moral decay/ . . . Not only 
did they fall away from monastic severities, they lost all manly and 
decent self-control. . . . Worse things than Savonarola had seen 
were to happen. And a catastrophe was inevitable. Erasmus laughed 



to scorn the Ciceronian pedantries [of sundry Cardinals named] ; he 
quotes with disgust the paganizing terms in which some Roman 
preachers travestied the persons and scenes of tK Gospels, . . . out- 
cry against cancerous vices which were sapping the life of Italy. . . . 
[Some] demanded reform according to Catholic principles [!];... 
[Others] taught education in principle and practice on orthodox 
lines. . . . The Sorbonne objected, however, to any publication of 
Scripture without approved Catholic notes ; and this in a day which 
might be justly termed one of rebuke and blasphemy. . . . Poggio, 
the mocking adversary of the clergy, was for half a century in the 
service of the popes. Filelfo, a pagan unabashed and foul, was re- 
warded by Nicholas V for his abominable satires. Pius II had the 
faults of a smart society journalist, and took neither himself nor his 
age seriously. Platina, with whom Paul II quarreled on political 
grounds, wrote a vindicative slanderous book, 'The Lives of the Roman 
Pontiffs,' which, however, was in some degree justified by the project 
of reformation *in Head and members' constantly put forth and newer 
fulfilled until Christendom had been rent in twain*' 5 (CE. xii, 767- 

Speaking again of prevailing conditions at the end of a thousand 
years of inspired care of the Christian morals, by their Holinesses, 
the following sentences culled from one article are a little cluster of the 
"fruits" of Christianity : "The scientific and ascetic training of the 
clergy left much to be desired, the moral standard of many being very 
low, and the practice of celibacy not everywhere observed. Not less 
serious was the condition of many monasteries of men, and even of 
women, . . . The members of the clergy were in many places re- 
garded with scorn. . . . As to the Christian people itself , in numerous 
districts ignorance, superstition, religious indifference, and immoral- 
ity were rife. . . . Worldly ideas, luxury and immorality rapidly 
gained ground at the centre of ecclesiastical life. When ecclesiastical 
authority grew weak at the fountain head, it necessarily decayed 
elsewhere. ... In proportion as the papal authority lost the respect 
of many, resentment grew against both the Curia and the Papacy. 
. . . This vast ecclesiastical wealth, . . . such riches in the hands 
of the clergy. . . . Higher intellectual culture was confined in a great 
measure to the higher clergy. . . . The parochial clergy were to a 


great extent ignorant and indifferent." (CE. xii, 700-703, passim.) 
The Church leaped to arms to prevent any reform of these de- 
grading conditions to which her holy guidance had brought Chris- 
tendom, and for over a century, until the Religious Peace of 1648, 
with fire and sword made Europe a slaughter-pen in the desperate 
effort to suppress the revolt and force its forged faith and its creed 
of love and morals, which we have just seen exemplified, down the 
throats of revolted and disgusted humanity. The Dominican "Dogs 
of the Lord" were let loose in all the bloody fiery fury of the Holy 
Inquisition; Alva, Tilly and Wallenstein ravaged and destroyed 
Europe, culminating in the glories of Magdeburg and St. Bartholo- 
mew for which His Holiness and his Church sang Te Deums. "Soon the 
Counter-Reformation, called into life by the Council of Trent (1545- 
63) to prevent the loss of the whole of middle Europe, appeared ; its 
success was assured by the aid of the Society of Jesus." (CE. v, 612.) 
Abetted by the crafty and cruel Society of Jesus, under its renowned 
leader this miracle is said to have been wrought : "St. Ignatius, alive 
to the causes which had provoked so many nations to revolt -from the 
clergy . . . did the most astonishing feat recorded in modern history. 
He reformed the Church by means of the papacy when sunk to its 
lowest ebb; and he took the heathen classics from neo-pagans to make 
them the instruments of Catholic education. ... In May, 1527, 
Rome was laid waste, its churches profaned, its libraries pillaged, by 
a rabble of miscreants. 'But,' sa id the Cardinal Cajetan, 'it -was a just 
judgment on the Romans. 5 ... It was a change so marked that 
Scaliger termed the Italians generally hypocrites. , . . The papacy 
aimed henceforth at becoming an 'ideal government under spiritual 
and converted men.' Urban VIII (1623-44) was the last who could be 
deemed a Renaissance pontiff." (CE. xii, 769.) This was over one 
hundred years after the boasted "reformation in Head and members. 55 
So here the Augean stables were at length cleansed ; the papacy 
for the fourth time in Volume I recorded as "sunk to its lowest ebb, 55 
was now to be "an ideal government under spiritual and converted 
men," and the chronic millennial infamies of Holy Church washed out 
by a baptism of Faith and "good works meet unto repentance." But 
was it so? 

Adrian VI was Holiness of Rome in 1522-1523 : "Appalling tasks 



lay before him in this [again] darkest hour of the Papacy. To extir- 
pate inveterate abuses ; to reform a court which thrived on corruption, 
and detested the very name of reform; to hold in leash the young and 
warlike princes, ready to bound at each other's throats, these were 
herculean labours. . . . His nuncio to Germany, Chierigati, [made 
the exaggerated] acknowledgment, that the Roman Court had been 
the fountain-head of all the corruptions in the Church. Cardinal 
Adrian of Castello (in 1517) was implicated in a charge of conspiring 
with Cardinal Petrucci to poison the pope Leo X, and confessed" 
(i, 160). "Under the direct orders of the pope, Clement VII, Arch- 
bishop B. [in 1538] caused many [Protestants in Scotland] to ... 
be put to death. Modern humanity condemns the cruel manner of their 
execution ; but such severities were the result of the spirit of the age" 
(ii, 374), which quite as thoroughly inspired the same Protestants 
and was as villainously practiced by them when they had the chance. 
The sixteenth century was "a scandalous age." (CE. ii, 375.) About 
1600 a special Papal representative "was commissioned to reform a 
convent at Naples, which by the laxity of its discipline had become 
a source of great scandal. Certain wicked men were accustomed to 
have clandestine meetings- with the nuns" (i, 472). Pope Alexander 
VII (1655-1667) was "elected after a struggle of eighty days; at a 
time when churchmen were being forced to realize the deplorable con- 
sequences, moral and financial, of nepotism ; . . . nepotic abuses came 
to weigh as heavily cos ever upon the papacy . . . endeavours to en- 
rich their families" (294). Pope Alexander VIII (1689-1691) "be- 
stowed on his relations the riches they were eager to accumulate ; in 
their behalf, and to the discredit of his pontificate, he revived sinecure 
offices. Out of compassion for the poor of well-nigh impoverished 
Italy, he sought to succor them by reducing the taxes" (295). 

"The eighteenth century was not an age remarkable for depth of 
spiritual life" (334). "Here [in the bishopric of St. Agatha, near 
Naples, in 1762] with 30,000 uninstructed people, 400 mostly indif- 
ferent and sometimes scandalous secular clergy, and 17 more or less 
relaxed religious houses ... a field so overgrown with weeds that 
they seemed the only crop" (337). In 1799 "people were already re- 
joicing that the Papacy and the Church had come to an end. But the 
priest, Count Antonio Rosmini . . . published his ideas in 1848 in 


the treatise 'Of the Five Plagues of the Church,' in which he also par- 
ticularly recommended the re-form of the Church. . . . The demand 
for reform in the States of the Church was m fact not unjustified." 
(CE. xiv, 264, 265.) Much later like data could be added. 

Thus in our search for its sweetness and light, we have as it were 
scratched the surface of the history of Holy Church, for a thousand 
five hundred years, as recorded by itself ; thus in one volume out of 
fifteen have we verified the priestly boast : "Her holiness appears in 
the fruits which she brings forth." The most lurid features, as under 
long lines of Holinesses, for example, Benedicts, Eugenes, and Johns, 
fall outside our limited alphabetical scope; we have made no note of 
the interminable political wars and throat-cuttings joyously pro- 
moted by fifteen hundred years of Popes ; nor of the infinite blood- 
lust and greed of the execrated Holy Inquisition and of interminable 
successions of Popes, papal Curias and blood-sodden prelates. The 
choice of every Pope is guided by the Holy Ghost itself, aided in- 
directly but effectively in a hundred instances by bribery and the dag- 
ger. Even this- trinity of Holy Electors of the Vicars of God has not 
always kept the "Succession of Peter" in a straight line; a goodly 
number of times the Spirit has descended upon numerous doublets and 
triplets of Holinesses at one and the same time : "At various times in 
the history of the Church illegal pretenders to the Papal Chair have 
arisen, and frequently exercised pontifical functions in defiance of the 
true occupant. According to Hergenrother, there are 29 [doublet and 
triplet sets] in the following order/' naming them, beginning about 
200 A. D. and extending down to 1449. (CE. i, 582.) The turmoils and 
scandals leading to and resulting from these, the priestly anathemas 
spit at each other, the blood and terror, and the unspeakably debased 
social conditions which made it all possible in the name of Christ, 
can be but faintly imagined. This is but a fractional and imperfect in- 
ventory of the crops of "the fruits which she has brought forth" since 
her first budding out of the graft of Forgery and Fraud upon the 
iron stock of Force. 

What price Religion ! Paganism and Christianity ! Which upon 
the record has been the more shameless and debauched, and wrought 
the worst for morality and civilization ? If, but for the glorious "civil- 
izing effects" of Christianity, "civilization would have been retarded 



for a thousand years" What would not Civilization be today but 
for the "sweetness and light" of the Church and its Dark Ages of 



"Of course, the beginnings of all profane knowledge can be traced back 
to the time when 'priest* and 'scholar' meant one and the same thing." (CE. 
vi, 447.) 

"There is nothing more despicable than an ignorant priest." Cardinal 
Farnese. (CE. v, 788-9.) 

A panoramic view, sketched by pious clerical pens, has passed 
before us, depicting in high light the outlines of moral and intellectual 
culture of two civilizations : the one Pagan, secular, brilliant, of pre- 
Christian Greece and Rome; the other "a civilization thoroughly 
saturated with Christianity," with Christian morality and culture ; 
this section, added from CE., must determine its intellectual achieve- 
ments. So insistent and ever-proclaimed are the clerical claims for 
the education of Christendom, and its "Christian civilization," which, 
without its glorious and heroic activities, <c would have been retarded 
for a thousand years," that it is but just and fair to let the Church re- 
peat several times what it claims to have done ; then let it tell in its 
own words what it did. 

Here are a few of the exalted cultural claims of the Church : "The 
Church, although officially the teacher of revealed truth only, has 
always been interested in the cultivation of every branch of human 
knowledge. But the truth unfolded by reason cannot contradict the 
truth revealed by God! The Encyclical next shows, by extracts from 
many Fathers of the Church, what reason helped by revelation can 
do for [to] the progress of human knowledge"! (Encyc. JEternir 
Patris, Leo XIII, 1879 ; CE. i, 177.) "The Christian Church during 
this era a fact of the greatest importance was the guardian of the 
remains of classical literature." (CE. vi, 485.) "The preservation of 
the fragments of Greek and Roman classics now extant is largely due 
to the monasteries, which for twelve centuries after the fall of the 
Western Empire were the custodians of manuscripts of the ancient 


Greek philosophy and the Latin rhetoricians." (CE. i, 696.) "In ad- 
dition to their prescribed studies, the monks were constantly occupied 
in copying the classic texts. 55 (CE. v, 303.) 


In the sweet-sounding music of this clerical chorus, a rudely jarring 
discord is struck by these dissonant notes : "The revival of the classics, 
lost for a thousand years in Western Christendom. . . . The loss of 
Greek authors and the decline of Church Latin into barbarism were 
misfortunes m a universal ruin." (CE. xii, 277.) An attempt by Charle- 
magne to establish even rudimentary education was abortive, and "the 
accumulated wisdom of the past . . . was in danger of perishing, 55 
but "When the permanent renaissance of learning came several cen- 
turies later, the light began again to pierce through the storm-clouds 
of feudal strife and anarchy. 55 (CE. i, 277.) We shall see that every 
scrap of Greek and Latin learning which, after twelve centuries, 
slowly filtered into Christendom, came from the hated Arabs through 
the more hated Jews, after Christian first contact with civilization 
through the Crusades: "Indeed, whatever influence came from the 
Mosque passed through the Synagogue before it reached the Church. 55 
(CE. i, 676.) 

In one singular and unintentional way, however, is it true that "the 
preservation of fragments of Greek and Roman classics is due to the 
monasteries, which were the custodians of manuscripts of the ancient 
Greek philosophy, 55 science, and literature. Such manuscripts existed 
in great numbers in the age of Greek and Roman culture ; they were 
written on enduring parchment. When the Light of the Cross dimmed 
Pagan culture, and its learning became abhorrent to the pious Chris- 
tian, the monks needed papyrus for their literary efforts, so they 
gathered in the manuscripts wherever found ; and thus they "pre- 
served 55 them: "Due to cost of vellum, old books were scraped and used 
again 55 (that is the meaning of "Palimpsest 55 ) for the scribbling 
of the precious monkish chronicles and theological folderol soon to 
be noticed. "In the West much use was made of old manuscripts from 
the seventh to the ninth century, when, in consequence of the disturbed 
state of the country, there was some scarcity of material, and the old 



volumes of neglected authors were used for more popular works. . . <. 
The practice continued down to the sixteenth century. Many 
Latin and most Greek manuscripts are on reused vellum. A manu- 
script in the Vatican contained part of the 91st Book of Livy's 
'Roman History/ The famous Sinai Bible discovered by Tischendorff 
was written over by lives of female saints. Parts of the Iliad and the 
'Elements* of Euclid were covered by monkish treatises. The *De Re- 
publica' of Cicero was discovered under the Commentary of Augustine 
on Psalms, and several of his Orations under the Acts of the Council 
of Chalcedon." Other such monkish palimpsests were discovered to 
contain the Institutes of Gaius ; eight orations of the Roman senator 
Symmachus, the Comedies of Plautus, parts of Euripides, epistles of 
Antoninus Pius, Lucius Verus, Marcus Aurelius, and others, the Tasti 
Consolaris* of 486, the Codex Theodosianus, are among the precious 
remains of Greek and Roman erudition which were "preserved" in this 
monkish fashion in the erudite monasteries. (NIE. xvii, 762-3.) As for 
"monks constantly occupied in copying the classic texts," for the 
preservation and diffusion of Pagan culture, it is a joke ! They couldn't 
read Greek nor good Latin, and nobody else could read at all ; also, 
Holy Church and Churchmen loathed Pagan culture and literature. 

The Church, however, got an early and fair start on its wonderful 
career as the organizer and creator of civilization. In 529 [by priest- 
prompted edict of Justinian] "the schools of philosophy were closed. 
From that date Christianity had no rival." (CE. ii, 43,) We have read 
the Imperial Law of Justinian with the fatal title : "Pagans Forbidden 
to give Instruction" ; consequently "the State schools of the Empire 
had fallen into decay." (CE. xiii, 555.) Thenceforth the Church, in- 
spired by its Holy Ghost, was the sole Mentor and Instructor of Chris- 
tendom. Before the dazzling Light diffused by the Church blinds us to 
the view, let us take a farewell look at the Pagan civilization of the 
Roman world, as recorded under the Antonine Emperors and their 
successors, such conditions prevailing quite up to the era of Justinian 
and the Church ; it will be a millennium and a half before we see a 
spark of such like : 

"The internal peace and prosperity were no less remarkable than 
the absence of war. Trade and commence flourished ; new routes were 
opened, and new roads built throughout the Empire, so that all parts 


of it were in close touch with the capital. The remarkable municipal 
life of the period, when new and flourishing cities covered the Roman 
world, is revealed by the numerous inscriptions that record the gen- 
erosity of wealthy patrons or the activity of free burghers. . . . 
Guilds and organizations of all conceivable kinds, mainly for philan- 
thropic purposes, came into existence everywhere. By means of these 
associations the poorer classes were in a sense insured against poverty. 
. . . The activity of the Emperor was not confined to merely official 
acts ; private movements for the succour of the poor and of orphans 
received his unstinted support. The scope of the alimentary institu- 
tions of former reigns was broadened, and the establishment of chari- 
table foundations such as that of the Tuellae Faustinianae' is a sure 
indication of a general softening of manners and a truer sense of 
humanity. The period was also one of considerable literary and scien- 
tific activity. . . . The most lasting influence of the life and reign of 
Antoninus was that which he exercised in the sphere of law. Five great 
Stoic jurisconsults [named] were the constant advisers of the Em- 
peror, and under his protection they infused a spirit of leniency and 
mildness into Roman legislation which effectually safeguarded the 
weak and unprotected, slaves, wards, and orphans, against aggres- 
sions of the powerful. , . . An impulse was given in this direction 
which produced the later golden period of Roman jurisprudence under 
Septimus Severus, Caracalla, and Alexander Severus." (CE, i, 587.) 
For vivid contrast, we may here recall the "vivid remark" of Bishop 
St. Bruno, in the year 1049, that "justice had perished" ( CE, vi, 793) ; 
and the confession, relating to the beginning of the Reformation five 
hundred years later : "Churchmen in high places were constantly un- 
mindful of justice." (CE. xii, 767.) The "golden period of Roman 
jurisprudence" had been replaced by Christian "superstitions in the 
administration of justice during many centuries of the Middle Ages, 
and known as ordeals or 'judgments of God. 5 . . . These 'judgments 
of God' gave rise to new superstitions. Whether guilty or not, persons 
subjected to the trials would often put more confidence in charms, 
magic formulas, and ointments than in the Providence of God." (CE. 
xiv, 341.) Up to as late as 1538 "the legal lore had hitherto been pre- 
sented in a very barbarous form." (CE. i, 273.) As for benevolence, 
charity, the care of the poor, the protection of the weak against the 



strong, the cursory Pagan record just quoted must suffice; their con- 
tinuance in the Christian Dark Ages is sufficiently belied by the 
shocking social conditions to be cursorily noticed in the general 
cultural sketch to follow. As for widows and orphans, one of the 
proudest brags of the clerics, the Church by sword and rack and 
stake, has made an infinity more of widows and orphans that she ever 
scantily cared for in her monkish lazzarettos and pestilential lying-in 
shambles. With respect to slavery, which the Church boasts to have 
suppressed, this pious lie is nailed by the fact of the gradual shifting 
of technical slavery into universal serfdom throughout Europe for 
centuries, and its persistence in "Christian" England, America and 
Brazil until almost the present generation, and the existence today of 
millions of slaves in very Christian Abyssinia ; and the world knows 
the part which the Christian soulsavers took in the United States in 
upholding slavery as a God-ordained institution of the Blessed Bible. 
But the Church not only aided and abetted slavery ; it owned slaves, 
and it actively engaged in the most revolting forms of slave-trade: 
"Clement V (1309) decreed that resisting Venetians should be sold into 
slavery, and Gregory XI and Sixtus IV [of blessed memory] decreed 
the same for the Florentines, and Julius II for both Florence and 
Bologna. The Bull by which Nicholas V (1442) encouraged Portugal 
to what became the organized trade in negro slaves. ... In 1538 
Paul III decreed slavery against all Englishmen who should dare to 
support Henry VIII against the pope" ! (Encyc. Brit., 14th ed. xix, 

The Church mightily prides itself on its suppression of the bloody 
sports of the arena, the gladiatorial combats, because the monk Telem- 
achus, after 400 A. D., jumped into the arena (with two Pagan com- 
panions) and protested against them, which act incited the Pagan 
throng in the Ampitheatre to urge their abolition. But for four 
hundred years nor Church nor Christian had raised a voice of protest ; 
and during as much of this period as it had the power, the Church was 
merrily murdering Pagans and heretics; and the cruelties of free 
combat in the arena were speedily replaced by the infamous torturings 
and slow burnings of countless human beings for Christ's sweet sake : 
while bull-fights adorn every holiday and holy day of the "Most Chris- 
tian" countries today. Fie for Christian "reforms" ! 


Following upon the Pagan cultural civilization depicted by CE. 
existing in the closing epoch of the Roman Empire, we have a lengthy 
account by the same clerical scholars of the Christian culture of the 
ensuing Age of Faith: "The learning and opinions of the first [Chris- 
tian] few hundred years were comprehensively set forth in the tre- 
mendous work of Isidore of Seville (d. 636). During the next few 
centuries, which were comparatively barren of literary achievements, 
the only men to achieve any celebrity were [five named up to 1003]." 
. . . Others are named up to 1280, "For all these Albertus Magnus 
had opened the door to the rich treasure-house of Greek and Arabian 
learning." (CE. vi, 449, 450.) The principal product of Christian 
erudition up to these times was ludicrous lying legends and saint and 
martyr tales : "Needless to say that they do not embody any real his- 
torical information, and their chief utility is to afford an example of 
the pious popular credulity of the times" (CE. i, 131). The state of 
Christian historical lore through these ages may be appreciated by the 
following summary : 

"The historical literature of the Middle Ages may be classed under 
three general heads : chronicles, annals, and lives of saints. ... As 
a matter of fact, profane history, as dealt with by Pagan historians, 
no longer appealed to Christian writers. History, as viewed from the 
Christian standpoint, took into account only the Kingdom of God, 
and to the new generation [of Christians] the centre of such history 
was the narration of the misfortunes undergone by the Jewish nation, 
a subject ignored by the Roman historians. Christians had need of a 
new general history in sympathy with their ideal. . . . Under Charle- 
magne . . . the great internal misfortunes and dissensions of the 
kingdom are carefully ignored, so as not to cast discredit on the reign- 
ing princes. . . . The majority of these local chronicles reproduce 
the traditions, popular or local, of the monastery which they concern 
and confine themselves to recording gossip and various kinds of in- 
formation, . . . without asking themselves whether the version of 
these sources had been tainted with legends, and they did not take the 
trouble to examine the origin and value of their information. . . . 
The authors were bounded by a limited horizon, often equipped with 
merely a rudimentary training. Such chronicles, moreover, were often 
written with the same purpose as the lives of the saints. Those, having 



a general tendency to enhance as much as possible the glory of their 
hero, were nothing more than panegyric. Monastic chronicles and 
annals were not free from this tendency, and often begin with an ac- 
count of the life of the saint who founded the abbey, concerning them- 
selves more with asceticism than with historical facts and events, which 
would be of much value to us today. In conclusion, the first part of 
these chronicles, written for the most part since the eleventh century, 
almost always recount legends, often based on oral tradition, but 
sometimes invented for the purpose of embellishing the early history 
of the monastery, and of thus increasing the devotion of the faithful. 
. . . Chronology especially was often treated carelessly." (CE. i, 
531-536, passim.) 

With respect to literature and history we have thus a millennial 
blank of Christian achievement : but the Church's forte was Science, 
for "the Church fosters and promotes the sciences in many ways," 
so long as they do not contradict the "sacred science of Christianity." 
This we may see exemplified in the following clerical summarization : 

"Speculations concerning the rotundity of the earth and the pos- 
sible existence of human beings 'with their feet turned towards ours,' 
were of interest to the Fathers of the early Church only in so far as 
they seemed to encroach upon the fundamental Christian dogma of the 
unity of the human race, and the consequent universality of original 
sin and redemption. This is clearly seen from the following passage of 
St. Augustine '(De Civitate Dei, xvi, 9) : '. . . For Scripture, which 
confirms the truth of its historical statements by the accomplishment 
of its prophecies, teaches no falsehood; and it is too absurd to say 
. . . there is a race of human beings not descended from that one first 
man.' This opinion of St. Augustine was commonly held until the 
progress of science . . . dissipated the scruples arising from a de- 
fective knowledge of geography. A singular exception occurs to us in 
the middle of the eighth century. From a letter of Pope St. Zachary 
(1 May, 748), addressed to St. Boniface, we learn that the great 
Apostle of Germany had invoked the papal censure upon Vergilius. 
Among other alleged misdeeds and errors was numbered that of hold- 
ing 'that beneath the earth there was another world and other men, 
another sun and moon.' In reply, the Pope directs St. Boniface to 
convoke a council and, 'if it be made clear* that Vergilius adheres to 


this 'perverse teaching, contrary to the Lord and to his own soul/ to 
'expel him from the Church, deprived of his priestly dignity' 1 This is 
the only information that we possess regarding an incident which is 
made to figure largely in the imaginary warfare between theology and 
science. . . . The case of the Irish monk who suffered the penalty of 
'being several centuries ahead of Ms age remains on the page of history, 
like the parallel case of Galileo, as a solemn admonition against a hasty 
resort to ecclesiastical censure," as CE. naively remarks. (CE. i, 

Summing up the vivifying cultural achievements of over a thousand 
years down to the beginning of the end of the regimen of Church em- 
brutishment of men, this ludicrous composite of confession of debase- 
ment and self -laudation greets us : "The Middle Ages did not bequeath 
to Rome any institutions that could be called scientific or literary 
academies. As a rule, there was slight inclination for such institutions. 
... A special reason why literature did not get a stronger foothold at 
Rome is to be found in the constant politico-religious disturbances of 
the Middle Ages. . . . Medieval Rome was certainly no place for 
learned academies. . . . From the earliest days of the Renaissance 
the Church was the highest type of such an academy 9 that is, of the 
broadest kind of culture"! (CE. i, 83, 84.) Yet despite this highest type 
of academy as was the Church, the broadest kind of culture which it 
personified and radiated, the full splendor of the Renaissance had been 
reacting upon and illuming the Church for two or three centuries, 
when we discover this amazing lack of clerical learning and intelligence 
confessed by the Church. The Protestant heresy was at its zenith ; in 
1559-74 the Protestants published an Ecclesiastical History called 
"Centuriators," in thirteen volumes, "showing century by century, how 
far the Catholic Church had departed from primitive teaching and 
practices," as CE. describes it. This heretic work caused "keen dis- 
tress and dismay in Catholic circles ; and provided the Reformers with 
a formidable weapon of 'attack on the Catholic Church. It did much 
harm. The feasability of a counter-attack appealed to Catholic 
scholars, but nothing adequate was provided, for the science of Mstory 
was still a thing of the future. Its founder was as yet but 21 years of 
a g e Baronius, later Cardinal. He studied hard, and later produced 
his Annales, 12 volumes, "which he had foreseen in a vision would be 



the term of his work," and by which the "Centuries were eclipsed, 55 
but in which he ruthlessly destroyed by sane and fearless criticism so 
many thousands of Church saint-and-martyr myths, that "the An- 
nals were condemned by the Spanish Inquisition" (CE. ii, 305, 306). 
Such was the net and gross result of fifteen hundred years of the 
much-boasted zeal for learning and teaching of the Divinely- 
appointed sole Teacher of Christendom, in the broad fields of histori- 
cal knowledge, literature, and general intellectual culture. In the 
grand realm of the Sciences, which the Church has ever cherished and 
encouraged, may we hope for bigger and better results? 


"The Church, far from hindering the pursuit of the sciences, fosters 
and promotes them in many ways." (CE. xiii, 609.) 

"When a dogma contradicts a scientific assertion, the latter has to be re- 
vised"! (CE. xiii, 607.) 

The Middle Ages, as generally understood, "is a term used to desig- 
nate that period of European history between the Fall of the Roman 
Empire and about the middle of the fifteenth century," (CE. x, 235), 
the era of the discovery of printing, a full thousand years. The 
highly significant and evidently unstudied explanation is made : "The 
Middle Ages have become an interlude, clearly bounded on both ex- 
tremities by a more civilized or humane idea of life, which men are en- 
deavouring to realize in politics, education, manners, literature, and 
religion." (CE. xii, 765.) Those two clearly bounded extremities are 
the Pagan civilization of the dying Roman Empire and the secular, 
skeptical, rationalistic "Renaissance of Knowledge," which CE. cleri- 
cally complains embodied "the ideas and spirit of classic paganism." 
(i, 34.) We have just seen that during this Millennium "thoroughly 
saturated with Christianity" there was, in Christendom, no literature, 
other than theological treatises, monkish chronicles and Saint-tales, 
and no science of whatever category, except "sacred science" or 
theology: "Theology is the very science of faith itself" (CE. xiii, 
598) ; and we have seen to what intellectual status that sacred science 
led the human mind. The zeal with which the Church pursued its propa- 
gation of the Faith as the central feature of its educational system, 


with all other branches of human knowledge as an indifferent "side 
line/* we have noted, in the language of the ecclesiastical scientists. 
The Church maintains that it "f osters and promotes sciences in many 
ways" and inf erentially always has encouraged and protected science 
in all its manifold forms of utilitarian humanism. But Holy Church 
has some naive notions of science and of the ecclesiastical limitations 
imposed upon it. While thus fostering and promoting the sciences, 
"Yet," says CE., "while acknowledging the freedom due to them, she 
tries to preserve them from falling into errors contrary to Divine 
doctrine, and from overstepping their boundaries and throwing mto 
confusion matters that belong to the domain of faith" ! ( Vatican De- 
crees, Sess. Ill, De Fide, ch. 4 ; CE. xiii, 609.) 

The priestly principle of the subordination of scientific fact to 
dogmatic faith is thus naively posed : 

"Science is limited by truth, which belongs to its very essence. Should 
science ever have to choose between truth and freedom (a choice not at all 
imaginary), it must under all circumstances decide for truth, under the 
penalty of self-extermination. . . . Ethics is more important for mankind 
than science. Those who believe in revelation, know that the Commandments 
are the criteria by which men will be judged. (Matt, xxv, 35-46.) . . . 

"The demand for unlimited freedom in science is unreasonable and 
unjust, because it leads to license and rebellion. ... To submit one's 
understanding to a doctrine supposed [is that all?] to be Divine and 
guaranteed to be infallible is undoubtedly more consistent than to accept 
prevailing postulates of science. . . . 

"When a clearly defined dogma contradicts a scientific assertion, THE 
LATTER HAS TO BE REVISED" ! (CE. xiii, 598-607, passim.) 

Than this last sentence, a more palpable and ridiculous untruth has 
never been uttered by the clerical Liars of the Lord. No single scientific 
fact ever discovered and proclaimed, in all the struggling history of 
Science in defiance of Church, has ever been "revised, 55 altered or with- 
drawn in deference to religious Dogma. Every fact of science has 
proudly and triumphantly defied and refuted Dogma and Church, 
and made them both cheap and ridiculous. Faith hates facts ; they are 
forever divorced on grounds of congenital incompatibility. The 
Church, True Church, and Protestant, has .screamed and reviled at 
every truth of Science which was ever discovered; with high priestly 



anathema, the curse of God, with prison, rack, and stake, it has sought 
to suppress and kill every thought of the human mind, every bold 
thinker, whose truths for the benefit of mankind have contradicted 
and ridiculed it and its holy dogmas. Every single one ; I challenge the 
production of a solitary instance of exception. The catalogue is too 
vast to even summarize here ; for details and proofs the monumental 
works of Dr. Andrew D. White, The Warfare between Science and 
Theology, and Dr. John W. Draper's Conflict between Science and 
Religion, (the latter on the Church's Index of Prohibited Books), 
may be profitably consulted and are cheerfully recommended in ref- 
utation of this example of priestly mendacity. We have read what 
happened to that "singular exception," the Irish monk Bishop 

But let the false pretense be exposed by a few examples given by the 
American apologist for "the Holy See, deservedly known as the nurs- 
ing mother of schools and universities," such as we have above admired. 
Until these "universities" began, about the year 1211 (CE. xii, 766) 
of the Christian epoch, no one had dared to think ; Christendom was too 
steeped in ignorance and credulity to think. These Middle Ages, says 
CE. (xii, 38), were "a civilization thoroughly saturated with Chris- 
tianity," and herefore incapable of scientific thought or feeling. "All 
Greek learning [had been] lost for a thousand years in Western 
Christendom. . . . The loss of Greek authors and the decline of 
Church Latin [as well as the Latin Church] into barbarism were mis- 
fortunes in a universal ruin." (CE. xii, 765.) But men's minds could 
not forever be kept in the chains of priestly dominance ; Gulliver began 
to wake and rouse and to struggle against the multiplied strands of 
theological cobwebs with which the Lilliputs of Faith had fast bound 
him while in his millennial sleep of the Christian Dark Ages of Faith. 
"Under these circumstances," admits CE., "a revival of learning 
so soon as the West was capable of it, might have been foreseen." (CE. 
xxi, 765.) The Church was keen and hostile, and did forsee what was 
coming. The first University was founded in 1211 ; in identically that 
time the Holy Inquisition was established by His Holiness Innocent III 
to guard against heretics and "other innovators." "The taking of 
Constantinople in 1204, the introduction of Arabian, Jewish, and 
Greek works into the Christian schools, the rise of the universities 


these are the events which led to the extraordinary intellectual activity 
of the thirteenth century. . . . Even in the Christian schools there 
were declared Pantheists . . . who bade fair to prejudice the cause of 
Aristotelianism. These developments were suppressed by the most 
stringent disciplinary measures during the first few decades of the 
thirteenth century. . . . Roger Bacon demonstrated by his unsuc- 
cessful attempts to develop the natural sciences the possibilities of 
another kind which were latent in Aristotelianism." (CE. xiii, 548, 

Roger Bacon (1214-1294), the "Doctor Mirabilis," whose "at- 
tempts to develop the natural sciences" were so drastically suppressed, 
was the genius of the dawning "Revival of Learning" the Renais- 
sance. He wrote over eighty books, a number of the most important in 
a secret cryptogram for fear of the ecclesiastical consequences which 
he finally suffered, "It is in these treatises that Bacon speaks of the 
reflection of light, mirages, burning-mirrors, of the diameters of the 
celestial bodies and their distances from one another, of their conjunc- 
tion and eclipses ; that he explains the laws of ebb and flow, proves the 
Julian calendar to be wrong; he explains the composition and effects 
of gunpowder, discusses and affirms the possibility of steam-vessels and 
aerostats, of microscopes and telescopes, and some other inventions 
made many centuries later. . . . Tope Nicholas IV, on the advice of 
many brethren condemned and rejected the doctrine of the English 
brother Roger Bacon, Doctor of Divinity, which contains many 
suspect innovations, by reason of which Roger was imprisoned' 12 or 
14 years" (CE. xiii, 112), until death released him from the strangling 
clutches of the "nursing-mother of schools and Universities," which 
always "encourages Science" ! 

Roger's great German contemporary "Blessed Albertus Magnus" 
(c. 1206-1280), was "accused of magic and of neglecting the sacred 
sciences. . . . Albert respected authority and traditions, was pru- 
dent in proposing the results of his investigations. . . . sometimes he 
hesitates and does not express his own opinion, probably because Tie 
feared that his theories, which were * advanced 9 for those times [when 
Church was "far from hindering the pursuit of the sciences"], 
would excite surprise and occasion unfavorable comment." Among the 
products of his "magic," Blessed Albert "gives an elaborate demon- 



stration of the sphericity of the earth, . . . More important than 
Albert's development of the physical sciences was his influence on the 
study of philosophy and theology. , . . 'All inferior (i. e. natural) 
sciences should 'be servants (ancellae) of Theology, which is superior 
and the mistress 9 (Aquinas). 55 (CE. i, 265-6.) Thus the Church 
thwarted and prevented what would have been the much earlier 
"triumph of scientific discovery, with which; as a rule, . . the seats 
of academic authority had too little sympathy/' (CE. xiii, 549.) 

The criminal ignorance and bigotry of the Church are nowhere 
more convictingly evident than in its repression of medical science 
through the ages when pestilence and plague swept unchecked through 
Christendom, while holy priests and monks chanted litanies and scared 
devils as the sole means of staying the ravages of Disease and Death. 
Listen to the same old story : "Modern medical science rests upon a 
Greek foundation. . . . The secret of the immortality of Hippocrates 
rests on the fact that he pointed out the means whereby medicine be- 
came a science. . . . Hippocratic medical science celebrated its 
renascence in the eighteenth century. * . . Arabian medical science 
forms an important chapter in the history of the development of 
medicine, [largely] because it preserved Greek medical science. , . . 
With the decline of Arabian rule [and Christian rise, in Spain] ' 
began the decay of medicine. ... In 1085 Toledo was taken from 
the Moors, and Spain became the transmitter of Arabian medicine." 
Here comes in the first medical scientist to defy the Church and escape 
its Holy Inquisition. Vesalius (born 1511), became physician to the 
Emperor Charles V ; "his eagerness to learn went so far that he stole 
corpses from the gallows to work on at night in his room. . . . The 
supreme service of Vesalius is that he for the first time [in 1500 years 
of Church cherishing of Science], with information derived from the 
direct study of the dead body, attacked with keen criticism the hitherto 
unassailable Galen, and thus brought about its overthrow. Vesalius is 
the founder of scientific anatomy and of the technique of modern dis- 
section. Unfortunately, he himself destroyed a part of his manuscripts 
on learning that his enemies intended to submit his work to ecclesias- 
tical censure"! (CE. x, 123-130, passim.) Indeed, "at that era a 
scholar . . . who generally struck out so many new ideas in oppo- 
sition to the commonly held opinion, could easily be accused of heresy. 


So many of his relations with Protestant scholars appeared suspicious. 
, . . Personally lie avoided expressing his opinion, in order not to fall 
under suspicion of heresy"! (CE. xv, 379. ) In defiance of the ban of the 
Holy Ghost on dissection and anatomy, Vesalius dissected the stolen 
corpses: his work disproved the Luz, or "Resurrection Bone," the 
nucleus of the heavenly restoration of the human body, and disclosed 
that Adam's missing rib, lost since Eve was carved from it some 4500 
years previously, was still there. These impious refutations of the 
Church's sacred science so enraged the clerical savants that it re- 
quired all the efforts of the Emperor to save his great physician from 
the Dogs of the Lord and the Holy Inquisition. 

A word only may be added on the highly significant question of hos- 
pitals and asylums in the Ages of Faith. "The idealism of medieval 
theological beliefs led to the founding of orphan asylums and hospitals. 
But the impracticability and *other-worldliness' of the Middle Ages 
prevented effective treatment of the diseases of the inmates. Such 
hospitals were merely dark, crowded, and unsanitary places of refuge 
for the needy and sick, who received no rational medical attention. 
. . . The Middle Ages, which some profess to admire, were in reality 
times of low civilization." For a shocking account of the hospitals, 
lying-in dens and insane pens of medieval Christian idealism, reference 
must be made to Dr. Henry W. Haggard's Devils, Drugs and Doctors; 
(cf . CE. vii, 492 ; x, 125) . Such as these miserable lazzaretti were, they 
were for the superstitious Faithful only : "The bigoted Pius V actually 
directed that no medical assistance should be given to any person who 
declined spiritual attendance"! (Macauley, Const. Essays; Church 
and State, p. 136.) 

But for the benighted theological repression of thought and of 
discovery of the secrets and powers of Nature, here barely hinted, the 
germs of modern science and invention which lay latent and struggling 
in the fertile minds of these great pioneers, would have quickly de- 
veloped and would have recreated civilization and enriched humanity 
centuries before they did, when Holy Church got too feeble and dis- 
credited longer to enchain the minds of men. But, as it was, the "sacred 
science of Christianity" must be protected by force and proscription 
against the facts and knowledge of Nature and the quickening minds 
of men. To guard its precious Bible "revelations," the Church upheld 



the Bible and forced all men to close their minds when they opened its 
sacred pages. At last, Galileo fitted two bits of glass into an old Church 
organ-pipe, poked it at the "firmament of heaven" which had cost 
Jehovah a whole day's work, and, Lo ! the whole of the "sacred science 55 
of the Church collapsed into universal ruin ! The truth of God's reve- 
lation became an exploded myth, and its inspired Bible a book of 
Fable. The holy Church screeched in terror its unholy anathemas. 
"What, more than all," confesses the CJE., "raised alarm [over the 
discoveries of Copernicus and Galileo], was anxiety -for the credit of 
Holy Scripture, the letter of which was then universally believed to be 
the supreme authority in matters of SCIENCE, as in all others." (CE. 
vi, 344.) The Church made monstrous efforts to murder the new 
thought : "we know from the calendar of saints and other sources how 
much had been done to check the wild license of thought and speech in 
the Peninsula. Giordano Bruno, renegade and pantheist, was burnt in 
1600; Campanella spent [27] long years in prison. The different 
measures meted out to Copernicus by Clement VII and to Galileo by 
Paul V need no comment [its shame chokes the Church] ! The papacy 
aimed henceforth at becoming an 'ideal government under spiritual 
and converted men/" (CE. xii, 768.) The Church missed this aim; 
but with the unholy aid of its Holy Inquisition, which in 1542 it de- 
clared to be "the supreme tribunal for the whole world" (CE. xiii, 
137), and its sacred "Index of Prohibited Books,' 5 instituted in 1557, 
it murdered men and thought for yet several centuries. The up-to-date 
edition of 1929 closes the minds of the "Faithful 55 to over 5,000 books 
of the highest intellectual merit, as partially catalogued in the news 
dispatches. (N. Y. Herald-Tribune, Nov. 11, and Dec. 1, 1930). This 
precious Proscription for preserving the "purity and genumeness of 
her Apostolic doctrine" intact for the "guileless and innocent 
hearts 99 of the Babes of Faith, and to prevent them from learning 
anything which might put them "on inquiry' 5 as to the "purity 
and genuineness 55 of these holy "Apostolic" myths, includes the im- 
mortal works of Gibbon, Sterne, Dumas, Victor Hugo, our own Dr. 
Draper, Anatole France, La Fontaine, Lamartine, Balzac, Rousseau, 
Steele, Addison, Talleyrand, Henry Hallam, Voltaire, Zola, Maeter- 
linck, (this my Book will probably be added by special Decree) ; in 
a word every book by (mine excluded) the brilliant and fearless 


thinkers of the world who have scorned Holy Church, and have been 
laureated by winning inclusion in this Holy Index of Inspired Igno- 
rance. It is a vain and foolish gesture of Bigotry, defeating its own 
malicious purpose: "Prohibited Books illuminate the world; words 
suppressed or condemned are repeated from one end of the world to 
the other," as Emerson admirably has expressed. But no wonder that 
"a [Faithful] Christian child knows more of the important truths [of 
a certain brand] than did Kant, Herbert Spencer, or Huxley," as is the 
"sour grapes" sneer of CE. (xiii, 607) at those whose minds are free 
to seek and find the truths of Nature and work from them true Miracles 
of Science for the boundless benefit of Man. 

This enlightened Index, established at the behest of the Holy Ghost 
for keeping men ignorant, dates from the foundation of the Faith ; it 
deserves a word of admiration, which may be spoken by its learned 
apologist : "Before the art of printing was discovered, it sufficed to 
burn a few manuscript copies to prevent the spreading of a doctrine. 
So it was done at Ephesus in the presence of St. Paul (Acts xix, 19). 
It is known that the other Apostles, the Fathers of the Church, and 
the Council of Nice (325) exercised the same authority; [citing] the 
various censures, prohibitions, and indexes issued by cities, universi- 
ties, bishops, provincial councils, and popes, through the Christian 
centuries." (CE. xiii, 607.) Who wonders that they were "The Dark 

With the final childish, senile sneer of the Church we will dismiss 
this phase of examination of the paralyzing efficiency of Faith. Says 
our guardian of the archaic fossils embedded in the Rock of Faith : "It 
is true, the believer is less free in his knowledge than the unbeliever, 
but only because he [which one?] knows more. Hence it is, that a well- 
instructed Christian child knows more of the important truths than did 
Kant, Herbert Spencer, or Huxley. Believing scientists [a self- 
stultification] do not wish to be free-thinkers just as respectable 
people do not wish to be vagabonds"! (CE. xiii, 607.) 

So be it ! But the vagabonds of Free Thought are those who, at in- 
finite cost of torture and blood, through all the centuries of Creed and 
Crime of the Church, and in heroic scorn of the Church and her "sacred 
science," have made our dearly-earned civilization what even it is to- 
day. Step by step, from contest to ultimate conquest, in every single 



conflict of Fact with Faith, the Church has been defeated and has 
retreated put to shaming rout. It has been a slow and tortuous 

'Tor faith, fanatic faith, once wedded fast 
To some dear falsehood, hugs it to the last" ! 

But fantastic Faith has wondrous powers of "accommodation" and 
specious tenacity of false pretense of being forever inspiredly right. 
The process of adjustment has throughout a thousand instances been 
the same : Faith is confronted with a discrediting Fact ; it curses it and 
denies it. When the fact is crammed down its throat and it is forced to 
recognize it, it lyingly denies that it had ever denied it. Then when all 
mankind has united in joyful acceptance of the new fact, the arch 
hypocrite declares that it is entirely in accord with its "sacred 
science," and tries to steal all credit for it as one of its very own grand 
contributions to "Christian civilization," and sanctimoniously 
wheezes, "How much grander a concept it gives of the infinite knowl- 
edge and glory of Gawd in His wonderful process of Nature" ! Oh, 
Hypocrisy ! Thou art the Church of God 1 "Semper eadem" lying 
and shameless ! 

A thrilling retrospect, and inspirational look into the Future, are 
thus expressed: "It is to scientific devotion more than to any other 
cause that man owes his present position on a new earth and under new 
heavens. Nothing else has so immeasurably enlarged his conception. 
Everywhere his experiments have opened up stretches of infinity . . . 
Personified Science might indeed be proud to have begun so humbly 
and to have achieved so much. By the use of her method men have 
weighed the planets as in scales, they have read the secrets of the 
animal and vegetable world. They have discovered Vhat is in man, 5 not 
wholly, but in some large and wonderful degree. Instead of the burnt- 
out lamp of dogmatism Science has given to humanity c the light that 
shineth more and more unto the perfect day.' In an effort to minimize 
drudgery and misery her great discoveries have attained to concrete 
availability in useful arts that have remade the world and increased 
immeasurably the comfort of men and their joy Scientific de- 
votion has broadened the horizon of man at every step. In the course 
of time humanity must leave the shrines of its cherished idols behind 


and push steadily on ! Sensing the poetic nature of this truth, James 
Russell Lowell spoke in verse to those of his fellow men who could 

'New times demand new measures and new men; 
The world advances, and in time outgrows 
The laws which in our father's times were best; 
And, doubtless, after us, some purer scheme 
Will be shaped out by wiser men then we, 
Made wiser by the steady growth of truth.' "... 

(Dr. Ernest R. Trattner : The Autobiography of God, pp. 289 et seq. 9 
passim. Scribner's; 1930. Cf. Science Remaking the World: Cald- 
well and Slosson ; Doubleday, Page ; 1924 ; Two Thousand Years of 
Science: Harvey-Gibson; Mactnillan; 1929). 

In glorious contrast to the murderous principles' and practices of 

"Eeason did never sentence or condemn 
Faith to the torture. Freedom all she claims 
For larger understanding of her aims; 
Hers no evasion, sleight, or stratagem, 
But only fearless quest our ignorance to stem." 


Gulliver Awakes 

"The RENAISSANCE the achievements of the modern spirit in opposition 
to the spirit which prevailed during the Middle Ages" ! (CE. xii. 765.) 

During the Dark Ages of Faith men were born into the world with 
the same capacities and potentialities of intellect as were the Sages of 
Greece and the Jurisconsults and Statesmen of Rome. The poles are 
not farther apart, however, day and night not more different in volume 
of light, than the pre-Christian and Christian eras in point of intel- 
lectual product. Why so vast a difference? Simply that the pre- 
Christian mind was free, and explored unfettered and unafraid the 
boundless zones of Nature, in search of the Supreme Good and the 
practical benefits to be wrung from the world in which Pagan man 
lived for the benefit of himself and of his kind : while the Christian mind 



was bound by what it regarded as revealed Truth and shackled by 
theology and priestcraft, which closed every highway and bypath of 
approach to Nature with the warning sign: "No Thoroughfare. 
Moses." "When one has once believed, search should cease," as Father 
Tertullian said. The ban of Eden "Of the fruit of the Tree of 
Knowledge thou shalt not eat," was enforced by the Priest by ecclesi- 
astical censorship and burning of books, by the Inquisition of Faith, 
the Index, the rack, the stake. The ingrained aim and end of Man was 
Heaven; for that other-worldly destiny alone was he taught and 
trained ; that was the whole Christian scheme of education and outlook 
on life ; the things of this world were contemned and ignored. 

Through these Ages of Faith two careers only were open to men 
priestcraft and military. With rarest exception only clerical persons 
could read or write ; the great masses of the peoples were utterly illit- 
erate, ignorant, superstitious, devout slaves of priestcraft ; their civil 
status serfs ; they lived in filth and squalor unbelievable, wearing their 
coarse fabric or leathern garments until they rotted off their unwashed 
bodies, the victims of disease, plagues and famines which often killed 
off near half the population, and aided by wars and rapine incessant, 
greatly incited and waged by the political Church to further its cor- 
rupt greed and ambition, keep the squalid population of Europe at a 
standstill, so that it took a century to double the miserable masses, fed 
on black rye bread and slops, and on lying saint-tales, martyr-myths 
and forged relics for increase of stupid and credulous devotion to its 
faithless Faith and Priests, the while they were brutalized and kept 
savage by the almost daily free spectacles furnished by Holy Church of 
public torturings and burnings by slow priest-set fires of countless 
heroic men and women who were unafraid to despise and defy the 
priests. Faith thus flourished on ignorance and credulity, which the 
Church diligently fostered and exploited for its unholy purposes of 
wealth and power, of rule by ruin. As none but priests could read and 
write, while kings and public men were mere soldiers and illiterates, 
and public business must be carried on through written documents, the 
public offices of State, from the King's chancellor and ambassadors to 
the lowliest clerks, were priests, and thus Priestcraft and Church in- 
creased their sinister power and dominance and wealth. These facts 
explain the sinister motive of the priestly monopoly of literacy, and 


fully account for the crass ignorance of Christendom which the 
vaunted Teaching Mission of the Church entailed. 


For a long dark span of centuries Holy Church, as sole and unique, 
Divinely inspired and guided Teacher of Christendom, plied the gentle 
art of Pedagogy for the Faithful. The net result of the intellectual 
efforts of the Inspired Teacher may be summed up and made luminous 
by a couple of descriptions of the wonderful "benefit of clergy 5 * as a 
Teaching Institution. Says first Dr. James Harvey Robinson: "For 
six or seven centuries after the overthrow of the Roman government 
in the West [476], very few outside of the clergy ever dreamed of 
studying, or even of learning to read and write. Even in the Thirteenth 
Century an offender who wished to prove that he belonged to the clergy 
in order that he might be tried by a church court, had only to show 
that he could read a single line ; for it was assumed by the judges that 
no one unconnected with the church could read at all. It was therefore 
inevitable that all the teachers were clergymen, that almost all the 
books were written by priests and monks, and that the clergy was the 
ruling power in all intellectual, artistic, and literary matters the 
chief guardians and promoters of civilization. Moreover, the civil 
government was forced to rely upon churchmen to write out the public 
documents and proclamations. The priests and monks held the pen 
for the king. Representatives of the clergy sat in the king's councils 
and acted as his ministers ; in fact, the conduct of government largely 
devolved upon them." (Robinson, The Ordeal of Civilization, pp. 
157-8.) This "benefit of clergy, 5 ' in the legal sense in which it is above 
used, and the degraded state of ignorance which gave occasion for it 
and the presumptions of the clergy enforcing it, are defined and ex- 
plained by the clergy : "Benefit of Clergy. The exemption from the 
jurisdiction of the secular courts, which . . . was accorded to clergy- 
men. . . . When a clerk was brought before a court, he proved his 
claim to benefit of clergy by reading, and he was turned over to the 
ecclesiastical court, as only the clergy were generally able to read. 
This gave rise to the extension of the benefit of clergy to all who could 
read. [It is added, for historical interest] : The privilege of benefit of 



clergy was entirely abolished in England in 1827. In the Colonies it 
had been recognized, but by Act of Congress of 30 April, 1790, it 
was taken away in the Federal courts of the United States. Traces of 
it are found in some courts of different States, but it has been practi- 
cally outlawed by statutes or by adjudication." (CE. ii, 446-7.) All 
this serves to* confirm the truth of the statement, that the Church and 
the clergy imposed and perpetuated Ignorance as the basis of their 
sordid greed for power and control over the Ignorant. 



But for a wonder under such conditions, and after a thousand 
years, a slow but portentous change began to manifest itself in sodden 
Christendom. Note this pregnant statement: "Up to this time (1250) 
almost wholly absorbed in the supernatural, [men now] took more 
interest in worldly things. Unconditional renunciation of the world 
came to an end, and men grew more matter-of-fact and practical." 
(CE. vi, 493.) As the result of this "extraordinary change . . . edu- 
cation found its way among laymen, and it developed trade/' (/&.) 
This confirms the fact that only priests could read and write or had 
any sort of "education, 5 * in all those Church-taught ages when 
"scholar and priest meant one and the same thing." Indeed, it is stated : 
"Only the clergy were generally able to read." (CE. ii, 446.) About 
that time it was that the feeling of nationality first began to stir in 
minds of civil rulers and of people able to realize the imperial schemes 
of Holy Church for one great Empire under the rule of the Vicar of 

To forestall and check this dangerous restlessness of peoples, 
Kings, and nascent nationality, the Church devised that since time- 
honored scheme of joining restless factions in war on some common 
enemy, thus to avert domestic difficulties : here was born the gigantic 
folly and crime of the Crusades, for the pretended rescue of the empty 
and apocryphal "Sepluchre of Christ from the Infidel." This titanic 
scheme and its purposes are naively thus confessed : "The idea of the 
Crusades corresponds to a political conception which was realized in 
Christendom only from the eleventh to the fifteenth century : this sup- 


poses a union of all peoples and sovereigns wnder the direction of the 
popes. . . . The history of the Crusades is therefore intimately con- 
nected with that of the popes and the Church. These Holy Wars were 
essentially a papal enterprise. The idea of quelling all dissensions 
among Christians, of uniting them under the same standard and send- 
ing them forth against the Mohammedans was conceived in the 
eleventh century, at a time when there were as yet no organized states 
in Europe." (CE. iv, 543, 556.) A more gigantic crime and overwhelm- 
ing failure of ambitious design was probably never recorded in history. 
But far different and more transcendent results for civilization were 
brought about. Indeed, the Crusades were the beginning of European 
civilization. Says CE. : "The Crusades brought about results of which 
the popes had never dreamed, and which were perhaps the most im- 
portant of all. They reestablished traffic between the East and West 
which, after having been suspended for several centuries, was then 
resumed with even greater energy ; they were the means of bringing 
from the depths of their respective provinces and introducing into the 
most civilized Asiatic countries Western knights, to whom a new world 
was thus revealed, o/nd who returned to their native land filed with 
novel ideas. . . . Moreover, as early as the end of the twelfth century, 
the development of general culture was the direct result of these Holy 
Wars. ... If, indeed, the Christian civilization of Europe has be- 
come universal culture, in the highest sense, the glory redounds, in no 
small measure, to the Crusades"! (CE. iv, 556.) "The original aim of 
the Crusades, it is true, was not attained. But the civilization of West- 
ern Europe gained from the Orient the best the East had to give and 
thus was greatly aided in its development" (CE. v, 612). The yet 
quasi-barbarian rulers and rabbles of Christendom were thus brought 
into direct contact with a real civilization ; had their first glimpse of 
Arabian culture and civilized refinements of life, saw the men with 
whom they were in deadly conflict who were vastly their superiors in 
every ideal and practical accomplishment, and infinitely more humane. 
One instance will illustrate the difference between Christian brutality 
and Moslem humanity. When the Christian Crusaders of Christ cap- 
tured Jerusalem in 1099 and rushed in to rescue the tomb of their dead 
God from the Infidel, the streets of the Holy City ran with human blood 
up to the horses' bridles ; "the Christians entered Jerusalem from all 



sides [July 15, 1099] and slew its inhabitants regardless of age or 
sea; 99 ! (CE. iv, 547.) When nearly a century later (September 17, 
1187), Saladin and his "Infidel hosts" recaptured the City and over- 
threw the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a murder nor act of 
violence or outrage was committed on the inhabitants, and the mur- 
derous hordes of Christ were allowed to depart in peace. The Chris- 
tians began to learn what civilization was. Thus "the Crusades 
those magnificent expeditions which, inspired and supported by the 
Church, brought huge masses of people into contact with the Orient. 
. . . They were the means of spreading . . . the theories and 
methods of Arabian scholarship, at that time quite advanced) and 
thereby placing the researches of Western scholars on entirely new 
bases, and putting before them new aims and objects" (CE. vi, 448.) 
An immense confession of Christian failure ! 


As very pertinent to an understanding of the Rebirth of Learning, 
a paragraph will be devoted to a summary notice of Arabian culture 
and its saving influence on Christian ignorance ; for it was the Arabs 
who brought learning, literature and science to benighted Christen- 
dom and created the Renaissance which ended the Dark Ages of Faith. 

"When the Arabs came in contact with other civilizations (in the 
eighth century), notably with that of Persia, their speculative and 
scientific activities were stimulated into action. About A. D. 750 the 
Abassides, an enlightened line of Caliphs, came to the throne, who 
encouraged learning, and patronized the representatives of foreign 
culture. . . . They made ample use of Greek philosophy, and in their 
free inquiries into the secrets of nature, in which they soon outstripped 
the Greeks themselves, they paid little attention to the precepts of the 
Koran. . . . The Arabians translated [the works of Plato, Galen, 
and Aristotle]. . . . The Arabians developed Greek philosophy in its 
relation to medicine, and in this regard they exerted the most fdr- 
reaching influence in Europe. . . . The Arabian philosophy, as is 
well known, exercised a profound influence on the Scholastic philoso- 
phy of the twelfth and succeeding centuries. 5 * (CE. i, 675-6.) "The 
Arabian conquerors had learned from the Syrians the arts and sciences 


of the Greek world. They became especially proficient in medicine, 
mathematics, and philosophy, for the study of which they erected in 
every part of their domain schools and libraries. In the twelfth century 
[the first Christians ones were in the thirteenth'] Moorish Spain 
had nineteen colleges, and their renown attracted hundreds of Chris- 
tian scholars from every part of Europe. Herein lay a grave menace 
to Christian orthodoxy. 

"The BIBLE had been set up as an infallible source of knowledge 
not only in matters of religion, but of history, chronology, and physi- 
cal science. The result was a reaction against the very essentials of 
Christianity. . . . Biblical chronology, as then [19th century] 
understood, and the literal historic interpretation of the Book of Gene- 
sis were thrown into confusion by the advancing sciences astronomy, 
with its grand nebular hypothesis ; biology, with its even more fruitful 
theory of evolution; geology, and pre-historic archaeology. . . . 
But able apologists were forthcoming to assay a conciliation of science 
and religion"! (CE. i, 621, 622.) Be it noted, that it was not until late 
nineteenth century, when natural Science had made the "sacred 
science" of the Bible ridiculous, that the "conciliators" came forth 
with the Big False Pretense that "the Holy Bible was never intended as 
a Book of Science, but only of moral and religious edification" ! Why 
then, one wonders, does Holy Bible teach "Science" abound in what 
is though false and ridiculous essentially teachings of "science": 
e. g. the origin and form of the earth, and its fixity in space at the 
center of the universe as the "footstool of God" ; the position and 
movements of sun and stars in the phony "firmament of heaven" ; the 
origin and "Fall of Man" and the "special creation" of animals ; the 
geographical absurdities of the Garden of Eden and its Four Rivers, 
the Flood and the Divine original and purpose of the Rainbow ; the 
differentiation of languages at Babel; the cause of disease as the 
reactions to malignant devils in the inner works of men, and the Divine 
prescriptions for cure of the "Great Physician," the "Lord who heal- 
eth thee," by spit-salve, prayers of faith, ointment, holy water, and 
devil-exorcism by ignorant priests ? If the Holy Ghost of God wrote or 
inspired the Bible, funny it is that It talked such foolishness, which 
was exactly what ignorant priests would have written out of the igno- 
rance and superstitions of their times, without any inspiration of God 



to confirm them in the nonsense. If the All- Wise God who dictated the 
Blessed Bible and its foolish "science falsely so called," had just 
spoken the facts of his own divine Creation, truthfully, had just once 
said that the earth is round instead of flat, and revolves on its axis and 
around the sun instead of standing still while the sun went around it ; 
that disease is caused by dirt and germs- instead of by devils ; and had 
given sensible precepts of prophylaxis and of cure; in a word, had 
"revealed" out of his supposed Infinite Wisdom some of the things 
which are just now, after some thousands of years of Bible-worship 
and bloody -Church-repression, being painfully and dearly worked out 
by heroic human effort, Who would not gladly and proudly hail the 
"Holy Bible, Book Divine, 5 * and for a certainty know that it was truly 
the intellectual work of a God? But ! The priests and the parsons pre- 
tend yet that it is Divine ; men of science and the coming generation 
know that it is ignorant priestly Imposture. 

But to return to the Arabs, who "in their free inquiries into the 
secrets of Nature paid little attention to the precepts of the Koran," 
and were destined to "throw into confusion" the "sacred science" of 
the Blessed Bible. "It cannot be exactly said when the first translations 
of Arabic writings began to be received by the Christians of the West : 
probably about 100.0, In the beginning of the twelfth century the con- 
tributions of Mohammedan science and philosophy to Latin Christen- 
dom became more and more frequent and important. . . . About 1134 
John of Luna translated Al-Fergani's treatise 'Astronomy,' which 
was an abridgement of Ptolemy's 'Almagest,' thereby introducing 
Christians to the Ptolemaic system," followed by a page of other 
Arabian works translated for the Christians. (CE. xii, 49; cf. ib. xv, 
184.) Thus Christendom got even its grand fable of the earth as the 
center of the universe from the Greek Ptolemy through the Arabs, 
and damned Copernicus- and martyred Galileo for daring to disprove 
it. "In 1085 Toledo was taken from the Moors, and Spain became the 
transmitter of Arabian medicine." (CE. x, 130.) Gerard of Cremona 
(died 1187), "a twelfth century student of Arabic science and trans- 
lator from Arabic into Latin, went to Toledo, and soon acquired a 
great proficiency in Arabic ; he translated not only the 'Almagest,' 
but also the entire works of Avicenna, into Latin ; he translated 76 
books from Arabic into Latin. His activities, and that of a gro